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.

Quick Saturday Video Preview

I had a few minutes spare on Friday night, so I thought I'd quickly whizz through most of the cards. There are no tips as such, and my main intention was to show how quickly you can find races which may be of interest, i.e. for me, uncompetitive races.

There is also the first peek at a new feature on Full Form, which you might find interesting when it goes live next week. (Oh, and there's a peek at a second new feature coming next week, too!)

Good luck with your Saturday bets, and if you're not already a Gold subscriber, you can put that right here.

Good luck!
Matt

He Ain’t Heavy, He’s Actually A Really Good Wager…

When the going gets tough...

When the going gets tough...

I backed a winner yesterday. Believe me, if you've endured my recent form that's more a resuscitation than a boast or, heaven forbid, an aftertime.

Anyway, it won at 10/1 after I'd backed it at 7/1 (ever the judge, me), and it reminded me of an old post I wrote which was the inspiration for yesterday's bet as well as many other good ones in the interim.

That post is below, refreshed and updated - including a very appealing update on the systematic suggestion originally posited on 31st January 2014, three years less a fortnight ago.

**

Heavy horses are a breed apart

Rain, rain, incessant infernal rain. It seems just now - and, actually, at around this time most years - that pretty much all of the jumps racing is either abandoned or run on heavy ground.

Moan, moan, grumble, grumble, go the form students. "This ground throws up all sorts of freak results", etc etc, blah blah.

Well, guess what? It's a load of old cobblers. What those naysayers are implying is that they find it difficult to deal with a change in the ground. Me? I love it, because it often makes the job of handicapping easier, not harder.

Let me expound on that.

Heavy ground is the most extreme level of sodden turf on which horses are asked to race. Whilst it takes on varying degrees of mud and splosh depending on the track, it is always more testing than merely 'soft' ground. So, whereas most horses can be expected to perform, at least to some degree, on middling terrain - good to soft, good, and good to firm - only a subset of the equine population will perform close to their optimal on very quick or very slow turf.

In this study, I'm going to focus specifically on National Hunt handicap races, for two reasons:

1. There are not that many flat handicaps run on heavy ground (though results are similar to the below)

2. In non-handicap events - novice races and the like - it is as likely that a horse outclasses its rivals as it is that a horse 'out-acts' its rivals on the prevailing squelchy grass

Let's first look at the performance of horses in handicap races being run on heavy ground. The table below is sorted by number of previous heavy ground wins.

 

Nh Hcap performance by previous heavy ground wins

National Hunt Handicap performance by previous heavy ground wins

 

As we can see, the vast majority of horses have yet to win on heavy ground, and many of them will have never encountered such a test before. Indeed, after failing on a first attempt in the deep, many will never encounter such a test again.

Materially, note the correlation between number of heavy ground wins and the win percentage in subsequent heavy ground handicaps. Ignoring the small group of 5- and 6-time heavy ground winners that failed to score a further mud success, we can see a fair relationship between number of heavy ground wins and subsequent heavy win strike rate.

Whilst that is fairly logical and, in itself, not especially helpful, what is perhaps more surprising is that following multiple (two-plus) heavy ground winners in National Hunt handicaps run on heavy ground is a profitable strategy to embrace blindly, at Betfair SP or early prices at least.

Let me emphasise that with the following table:

 

Comparison of multi-mud winners versus 0 or 1 win

Comparison of multi-mud winners versus 0 or 1 win

 

The American author, James Quinn, talks throughout his book, The Complete Handicapper, about 'the rule of two'. This rule, again entirely sensible and a very good way of avoiding bad value bets, is predicated on the market overreaction to a single instance of an event.

That could be a single good run, a single heavy ground performance, or a single bad run. Or anything else which has not been replicated or built upon before or since. Hence the two-plus heavy ground wins proviso demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that a horse is likely to run to form on that sort of surface, all other things being equal.

 

How to optimize this knowledge

Getting to within 5% of parity at starting price with a simple stat like that opens a window of research opportunity through which we may be able to spot pockets of value.

Poor run last time out

One trick here, from a value perspective, may be to see if horses with a poor finishing position last time can improve the ROI. Focusing only on those runners which finished outside the top five on their previous start has a profound impact on the figures.

 

2+ heavy wins, outside the top five last time out

2+ heavy wins, outside the top five last time out

 

Firstly, it reduces the number of bets to roughly a half. Secondly, it retains an acceptable strike rate of 11% win and 27% place. Thirdly, the ROI is now around 10% on a meaningful number of bets at industry SP.

 

Mature. But not over-ripe...

Without tampering questionably with the dataset it is worth evaluating performance by age, as there do seem to be a fair number of octogenarians (in horse years at least) asked to persist with a fading career on heavy turf. The data bear that out:

 

Multi-heavy NH 'cap winners, not top 5 LTO, by age

Multi-heavy NH 'cap winners, not top 5 LTO, by age

 

The strike rates for horses in the prime of their careers - from ages seven to ten (using the more reliable place strike rates as guidance) - are significantly better than their older and younger counterparts.

And, in case you were wondering, that shape is not replicated when one removes the 'heavy going' factor. Overall, horses tend to place at a fairly consistent percentage (c.25%) under the other conditions outlined above from ages four to six, before dropping to 24% aged seven, 23% at eight and 21% at nine and ten. Older than that and the general population running in this context hit the board at less than 20%.

It probably makes sense that most horses would mature into sloggers at a slightly later time than those naturally equipped to race on faster terrain, and that is certainly what the data say.

Your first 30 days for just £1

Focusing only on those horses aged seven to ten with proven (multi-winning) heavy ground form in NH handicaps who were outside the top five last time gives this:

 

Multi-heavy winners, aged 7 to 10, in NH handicaps, who missed the top 5 LTO

Multi-heavy winners, aged 7 to 10, in NH handicaps, who missed the top 5 LTO

 

A 25% ROI on 1000 bets at starting price is pretty nifty. But, clearly, any approach with a 12% strike rate will suffer extended losing spells, and the figures above include two fairly painful downturns in 2010 and 2013.

One way to take the edge off that is to consider betting each way. Although not always a good strategy, with these fellows making the frame 30% of the time, it will definitely keep the shorter of bankroll engaged for longer, and help to ride out the worst of the inevitable corrections.

Backing each way at 9/2 or bigger in 5+ runner fields (i.e. each way races) gives 84 wins (10.1%) and 227 placed horses (27.28%) from 832 bets, for an SP profit of 335.12 points. Obviously, backing each way requires a two point stake (one win, one place), meaning the ROI is slightly diminished at 20.14%, but that's more profit overall and a more consistent draw.

 

"The Rules"

The 'rules' then, such as they are, go like this:

- Heavy ground National Hunt handicaps (hurdles or chases)
- Multiple (2+) previous heavy ground winner
- Finished 6th or worse, or failed to complete, last time out
- Aged seven to ten

 

In terms of explaining the 'system' in a sentence - something you should be looking to do when developing your own mechanistic approaches - we can say the following:

"On extremely testing going, look for proven ability from a horse in its prime that may have been badly outpaced last time"

I appreciate that, for some, the age brackets and last day finishing positions may seem too arbitrary. Fair enough, though it is worth noting a 'tapering' in the datasets at the edges of the ranges which lends a credibility to the numbers.

Regardless of that, one thing is clear: if a horse has shown it can win on heavy ground, and it ran a clunker last time, be prepared to forgive that clunker back on the quaggy stuff.

**

Finding this kind of horse

So, how to find these diamonds in the mud? Why, with the geegeez racecards of course! Here's an example from last week.

Courttown Oscar fits the bill snugly

Courtown Oscar fits the bill snugly

 

The Instant Expert tab reveals that Courtown Oscar was one of only two horses to have previously won twice or more on heavy ground, the other being Bryden Boy. But looking at their respective last time out figures, we can see that Bryden Boy won whereas Courtown Oscar was pulled up.

 

Courtown Oscar finished outside the top five last time

Courtown Oscar finished outside the top five last time

 

Also, take a look at how Oscar performed on heavy ground the last time he encountered it.

 

Impressive handicap previous on heavy

Impressive handicap previous on heavy - he won again

 

Courtown Oscar won at 8/1.

And if you look at the top form line in the image above, can you see who was second? Yes, Bryden Boy, the other multiple heavy ground winner.

The exacta paid £87.60, and no, of course I didn't have it!

[As an aside, One For Arthur - who Oscar beat on his previous heavy start - won the Warwick Classic Chase at the weekend; and Bryden Boy sandwiched his second place to Oscar with heavy ground scores either side. The form looks pretty solid!]

 

So, to recap, in order to find these horses:

  1. Look for meetings run on heavy ground (and be sure to check for going changes when the weather is closing in)
  2. Check Instant Expert ('win' button) for two or more going wins on heavy
  3. Check age and last time out finishing position on the card
  4. Er, that's it

You might also want to look at the overall previous form profile on heavy ground and, obviously, the depth of competition in the race from a going perspective. Though, looking purely through the system lens, that is not necessary.

**

Instant Expert and Full Form Filter are two components of the Geegeez Gold visual form book. If you're not currently a subscriber and would like to know more about what we offer, you can discover us here.

Good luck!

Matt

p.s. there's one runner today of interest in the context of the above... 😉

30 Days of Geegeez Gold for £1

How to Find Winners When There is Little Form in the Book

It's Newmarket's Future Champions Weekend today and tomorrow, comprising eight races restricted to two-year-olds only. Such contests are notoriously tricky from a betting perspective, because we have little or no form to go on. Worse, most of the contenders are still unexposed to a lesser or greater degree meaning they can be expected to improve on what they've demonstrated so far. So how do we frame a puzzle like this?

The first thing to say is that, personally, I'm not a massive fan of such heats. I prefer an established level of form in the book, with only one or two possible (and predictable) improvers: for instance, a low grade handicap with a horse stepping up markedly in trip and another running for the first time in a handicap after a month off the course.

But still, there are times when I'm forced to have a view on races with little form, the most everyday of which is when selecting a six race placepot sequence.

Here are six ways to get a handle on a minimal amount of form... Oh, and by the way, most of these approaches apply equally to a novice hurdle at Chepstow in January as they do to a juvenile Group 1 in October at HQ, so keep an open mind in terms of the usable context of these hints.

1 Horse Form

The most obvious and logical place to start is always the form book. Incomplete as the picture may be, the basic ability indicators are located right there. The Instant Expert, which I would never use as 'alpha and omega' for this - or indeed any - job, does offer a view on the story so far. As you can see from this example, taken from tomorrow's Autumn Stakes, it is only a partially complete puzzle.

Autumn Stakes Instant Expert

Autumn Stakes Instant Expert

 

Note two things in particular:

  1. The large number of grey boxes. These denote the absence of form for a given horse under one or more of today's conditions. For instance, Rodaini has yet to race over the distance of a mile, nor in a field of 8-11 runners. That latter point is a touch misleading because he's won in a seven runner race and a twelve runner race, too. [Side note: I personally use field size - and going - primarily when the race is run on an extreme, i.e. very small field or very large field; heavy or firm going]
  2. The number of red boxes where there is only one run to go on. It is extremely dangerous to draw strong conclusions from the evidence of one run, especially using the 'win' view on Instant Expert. Take a look at these two views of The Anvil:
The Anvil should not be discounted in spite of a line of red on the 'win' view

The Anvil should not be discounted in spite of a line of red on the 'win' view

 

On the win view, it would be easy for an inexperienced - or cursory - eye to discount The Anvil's chance. But the place view, superimposed below for contrast purposes, reveals a very different opinion on his prospects.

Closer inspection of his most recent form line informs that he was a fast-finishing second over course and distance last time out in a better race: a Group 2 compared with today's Group 3.

However, getting back to the main image, we can also give Montataire a chance. He is the most exposed in the field, with eight runs already to his name, and he's achieved more than most of these. The question is whether he is now susceptible to those who have a lot more to come and, on the evidence of his last run - behind The Anvil - the probability is that he is.

 

2 Speed Ratings

Although, like with the form in the book, the race times in the book are a retrospective on the contenders which fails to account for future improvement, they can be very useful for two reasons.

Firstly, it is often hard for the casual punter to discern between one set of form figures that read '11121' and another. Naturally, we should be more sophisticated in our outlook than that but, largely through conditioning - looking at very partial racecards in the printed press, predominantly - the eye still wanders to the numeric string at the left of a horse's name.

Ratings, especially speed ratings in juvenile races, help us to form a hierarchy from the pile of similar looking form figures.

Secondly, because most two-year-olds are inexperienced and immature, they tend to race 'with the choke out' (i.e. the go as fast as they can for as long as the can, with limited ability to proportion their energy for the task in hand). This means that most juvenile races - typically run at five to seven furlongs before October - are not tactical and the numbers are generally more reliable than might be the case in longer runs.

Here's an example for this afternoon's Cornwallis Stakes, to be run over the minimum trip of five furlongs. Battaash is the highest rated on Geegeez Speed Ratings (SR column, his rating 94), and we can see that his only poor run was on soft ground. We can also see that he's 16/1.

He's not raced on good to firm ground before, so that's a question mark - one that we will look at shortly - but he might be overpriced. At least we know he can run fast in what will be a fast-run event.

Top Speed Rating, and 16/1 in the Cornwallis Stakes

Top Speed Rating, and 16/1 in the Cornwallis Stakes

 

3 Subsequent Form Value

Another way of separating the good 123's from the not so good 123's is to look at what has happened to the other runners in those races since the wins and places were achieved. Here at geegeez, we use something called 'Then What?', which you can see in Battaash's form lines above, and also in the below: a view of the form for those to have previously run in the 4.20 this afternoon, a maiden fillies' race.

Which of the runs so far have worked out best? 'Then What?' has some suggestions

Which of the runs so far have worked out best? 'Then What?' has some suggestions

 

In the above, there are a couple of very interesting points to note. First, the favourite, Highland Pass, has run relatively slowly (48) thus far, and none of the three horses to come out of her races since have made the frame. It's a very small sample but doesn't light my fire when invited to accept 7/2 about her chance.

Compare that with the 68 and 65 rated fillies - the top two speed figures in the field (though plenty are making their debuts today, more on that shortly) - and she has some stepping up to do.

Vigee Le Brun is top rated, and her run has seen one winner from four to exit the race to date. Note, however, that her prior start was on soft ground, versus good to firm today.

The 65 filly is Paradwys, whose two runs have worked out well. Moreover, the most recent was over seven furlongs on good to firm, on the July course here at Newmarket. Clicking on the form line opens up the result, where we can see that all of the runners to finish in front of Paradwys that day to have run again since, have won. Now that's more interesting; and she's a 12/1 chance!

Will punters be in Paradwys this afternoon?

Will punters be in Paradwys this afternoon?

 

4 Trainer Form / Patterns

First time out, second time out, first time in a handicap, second time in a handicap, up in trip. When a horse does something new, or we have little form to go on, the habits of the trainer can help fill in some of the blanks.

A horse called Fleabiscuit runs in the Group 1 Fillies' Mile this afternoon. She's run once, and she won. No horses have emerged from that race - less than two weeks ago - so how do we know if Fleabiscuit has a chance today?

Her speed figure gives her plenty to find but, with just one run to her name so far, she could step forward significantly. Take a look at her trainer's form:

Your first 30 days for just £1
Trainer Hugo Palmer's record offers plenty of hope

Trainer Hugo Palmer's record offers plenty of hope

 

Hugo  Palmer is in perma-good form. He's been scoring at a near 40% rate in the past fortnight, and better than one in four over the entire month. He has the champion jockey-elect riding for him, and note Palmer's 'snippets' in the blue box above.

They show his performance over the last two years under certain relevant conditions. For example, we can see that he's got a nigh on 30% win rate with last time out winners. Moreover, he has a 27% strike rate with horses making their second racecourse start.

These are rock solid numbers, as we might expect from geegeez's implied man of the year. Fleabiscuit is probably not experienced - or talented - enough to win a race of this stature so early in her career. But she's not definitely not, and at 20/1 her trainer's record offers cause for optimism.

 

5 Sire Form

Earlier in this post, I mentioned a filly called Vigee Le Brun, whose one run came on soft ground, as opposed to today's good to firm. How could we know if she'll act on today's surface? The short answer is that we cannot know that; but what we can do is look to her sire for clues.

As with trainers above, geegeez also publishes Sire Snippets, attempting to shine a light on the two-year performance of stallions. Here's Vigee Le Brun's sire, Dark Angel:

Dark Angel's Sire Snippets in the context of this race

Dark Angel's Sire Snippets in the context of this race

 

We can see that Dark Angel has a close to 12% win rate overall in the last two years, which is incredible on 2264 runners. We can also see that two year olds and sprinters perform above the overall benchmark, at 12.22% and 12.63% respectively.

But what we can't see is how Dark Angel progeny have fared on good to firm ground. The reason for this is that the going can - and often does - change from when we publish this data to race time. Fear not, however, for we have that covered.

On the main race card, the going can be changed from a dropdown, and the revised going will reflect in both Instant Expert and Full Form Filter. In this case, we don't need to change the going, so we'll head straight over the FFF.

Dark Angel 5 year going formDark Angel 5 year going form

Dark Angel 5 year going form

 

As you can see, I've selected the Sire option top right, chosen Vigee Le Brun from the horse dropdown, then 5 year form, and going.

The Race Record box shows me Dark Angel's five-year record on today's (good to firm) going. It's 12.74%, which is again some way above his two year batting average overall, offering hope to backers of this filly.

I could also take this a step further and add distance to the filter, to see how Dark Angel's have fared over seven furlongs in the last five years.

Dark Angel five year distance and going form

Dark Angel five year distance and going form

 

Interestingly, this drops the win percentage back a good bit, and upon checking the two year form I noticed that it is even lower, so that would be a concern.

Full Form Filter is a very flexible tool, and its sire option is one of the most under-used elements of the entire arsenal.

 

6 The market

At the end of the day, in races where there is limited racecourse evidence on which to base a judgment, the market can be an insightful predictor. With a filly like Vigee Le Brun, I'd be very interested in whether she had taken support in the early skirmishes. Checking an odds comparison function, such as the 'Odds' tab on Geegeez, will shed some light.

Both Paradwys and Vigee Le Brun have taken support

Both Paradwys and Vigee Le Brun have taken support

 

During the time I've been writing this post, we can see that both Paradwys and especially Vigee Le Brun have taken support. They're not the only ones to be fancied, but this certainly helps - with confidence if nothing else - in making a wagering decision, allied to what we've learned for ourselves in points one to five of course!

**

Many people, including myself, use Gold mainly when the level of form is thoroughly exposed. But I hope the six suggestions above offer some food for thought in terms of how we can get a few inside lines on those where it is all in front of them. Gold is full of hints, tips and pointers, for all types of race. We just have to go a little 'off piste' in some situations. 🙂

Matt

p.s. Gold trial: 30 days access to the full Gold toolkit, speed ratings, tips, forum threads, reports, tracker, prize tipping league and more. One pound.

JOIN GEEGEEZ GOLD

If you've not yet sampled the amazing winner-getting tools and tips inside Geegeez Gold, you can take a 30 day £1 trial by clicking this link.

Become an Instant Expert… for Free

Every day, from Monday to Saturday, here at geegeez we give registered free users a 'Feature of the Day' alongside some Gold races of the day. On Thursdays, the Feature of the Day is Instant Expert, our unique traffic light visualization of the form book.

In the below video, I offer a few thoughts - both general and specific to Thursday's racing - on how you might derive benefit from Instant Expert.

I hope it helps.

Matt

STOP PRESS: The video showcased eight winners from 15 horses mentioned, at odds of 20/1, 9/1, 6/1, 5/1, 11/4 and four shorties. It also mentions a horse that finished 2nd, which was 16/1 at time of recording - the night before racing - and returned 11/2. THIS is the power of Instant Expert. 🙂

 

p.s. Don't forget to register... or...

JOIN GEEGEEZ GOLD

and have this amazing winner-getting tool, plus many more, as well as profitable tips inside Geegeez Gold, by taking a 30 day £1 trial by clicking this link.

 

Genesis of a Betting System (Part 5)

Part 5 brings us to October, and the changing of the seasons, a time when the forum systemites - or system forumites - have high hopes of yielding higher profits...

If you need to catch up, Part 1 can be read here, Part 2 herePart 3 here, and Part 4 here.

**


Ray Thompson

Small profit yesterday from the First and Last at Kem AW with Red Cossack at 25 and Isdaal at 55, plus Whisky Galore at Sligo, EP 20/1 (32) won at 12/1. Isdaal ran from the wrong stall btw, with no word from the Stewards room afterwards. Perhaps they didn’t notice what they’re paid to notice? Whisky Galore was a jumps bet, which I failed to notice wasn’t posted here 🙂
No shows from my 32 selections at Nottingham, which is a bit surprising as it’s one of the top system venues with 30 outsider winners last season (2014).

Today we have Beverley – only seven winners last year BUT two of them returned 120 and 65 with Bf.

Chelmsford (Cfd) is in it’s first year as an official track and it’s markedly different to the track (Great Leighs) it replaced, but we do have results for this year and it appears to be similar to every other track: 5 wins at 25, 50, 48, 34 and 25 in the first few weeks of the season (late March to early May), only one win in June (16/1 = 24) and many meetings but ZERO wins until September, when strikes at 16/1 (30), 16/1 (32), 16/1 (23), 25/1 (50) and 16/1 (22) brought the track back into being profitable.

The other three venues are jumps meetings, for which I’ll give you my system selections with the relevant data for each track in previous years and the knowledge that the regular big winners usually commence in November.

Bangor outsiders generally arrive regularly in Nov + Dec then disappear until near the end of the jumps season. Bangor is +153 points (82 Chase, 71 Hurdle)

Clonmel has a strong big-priced strike rate in March and April +42 points (-3 Chs, +45 Hdl)

Warwick’s favoured period for the rags is Dec-Mar when +48 pts (+12 Chs, +36 Hdl)

That probably doesn’t look too inviting, but random outsider wins do occur er… randomly?…..in other months

I have four at Bangor, Camachoice and Maoi Chinn Tire in the 3.25 and Miss Tiger Lily and Omgnotanother. A further 16 at Clonmel and ten at Warwick make up my jumps bets for today. I haven’t finalised my summer flat bets yet, but there are 21 at Bev. Cfd is the venue I’m struggling with to not have too many bets, but it all looks good so far (FLW).

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Minus 78 points yesterday with not a single winner puts a dent in the bank. Here we are today hoping the Saturday Curse doesn’t strike! I’m just about to look at the cards and I’ll come back to you with what I’m doing when I’ve sorted out the possibilities.

P.S. Just noticed that my post from yesterday isn’t here. I suspect that I wrote it all out then forgot to hit the submit button! Another senior moment… 🙁


Steve Walmsley

Time for an update on 2 full months of data.

Headlines First (detailed analysis to follow later)

Flat Handicaps (incl. AW) from 1 August to 30 September
All bets at Betfair Minimum £2.00

Total Nr of Bets: 2525
Winners: 111
Total Staked: £5050.00
Profit at BFSP: £617.70

More than respectable results, but there are some horrendous downswings, the most extreme was a loss of 219 points (£438.00) in a 10 day period between 14 and 24 September.

Thanks Ray, £300 per month for 10 minutes a day and almost zero effort seems like a good deal.


Ray Thompson

Cheers, Steve. The hard bit was working out what, when and how, but once that was done it’s pretty much a doddle. Steve said a while ago that the way to go is to just back everything eligible in each race, and while I’m inclined to agree I still have a gut feeling there’s something not yet right. I thought initially that really strong faves, 5/4 and less, really knocked the stuffing out of the usual suspects, but on closer inspection it becomes clear that the tighter the favourite, the BIGGER the other prices. So okay, you might lose a dozen or more due to odds-on shots, but when you beat those yukky faves it’s often those biggies – 25s, 33s 50s and more that just wipe out all those losses in an instant, particularly when the BFSP can be double, treble and more than ISP.

Yesterday was nice with two at Gowran and Nolecce in the last at Wolves. We’ve only got jumps today and 35 contenders over four courses should return something. Huntingdon has been good to me over the years with last year’s +60 points on Hurdles and “only” +13 on Chases (+346.75 to fivers), Kelso +29 Hurdles and +17 Chases, Tipperary +94 Hurdles, +16 Chases, and Utt +105 Hdls but MINUS a whole 2 points on Chases!

I’m off car-booting now, see ya’ll later.

Ray.

P.S. I’m away at a Grateful Dead thing from Wed to Sat next week, so worry not at my absence!


Ray Thompson

A superb win in the first at Utt yesterday when Royal Sea popped in at 40/1 and a surprising 138 at BFSP (although it peaked at well over 200 if anyone was monitoring!).

Today I have half a dozen at Meerkat Racing (as it’s endearingly called by certain ATR pundits) –

Mar 3.15HH Sinbad The Sailor 25/1, To Begin 22/1 and Come On Sunshine 22/1
Mar 3.50HC The Society Man 20/1
Mar 4.25HC Cara Court 20/1
Mar 4.55F Bling Noir 40/1
Market Rasen is +44 on Chases and +22 for Hurdles, I’ve only recently include NH Flat and so don’t have enough information yet to formulate meaningful results.

A further 19 at Pon and 28 at Wdr complete today’s investments. Ponte has had 11 wins (4Mdn, 7Hc) with two of the Mdns at 620 and 80 BFSP
Windsor has produced 15 winners (3Mdn, 12Hc) with highs of 70 (Mdn) and 65 (Hc) BFSP


Nessie123

Evening Ray,
Some good results yesterday and hopefully you earned a pretty packet today.
I didn’t have time to bet today due to a prior engagement but I’m back on it tomorrow,hopefully this weather will hang around as it seems to throw up some very interesting results.
Andy


Ray Thompson

Nothing on the jumps yesterday, but wow!, what a great day on the flat, especially the three at Ponte, with Top Beak at Windsor the icing on the cake. My 42 bets (answer to everything) after the five NRs made me an after-comm profit of £337.80.

98 flat bets today *gulp* and 21 on jumps at Tipperary (Stats – SR 16% HHrdls, 13% HChs; Points profit +94 Hdl, +16 Ch; October wins 40%)!

I’ll try to report in after racing, but I’m off to beautiful Fowey for a few days in the morning, so might be a bit busy packing tonight.

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Quick note before I leave: 6 winners yesterday, profit after commission: +£193.80. 5 non-runners.

Important observation: grab early prices at Betfair for everything 16/1 – 33/1, BUT select BFSP AT THE OFF for anything 40/1+

See you in a few days!


Ray Thompson

A profitable week, some huge prices from Betfair, and welcome back me! Where’s my party? 😉 64 bets today and the payouts have been getting bigger as the week went on so I’m expecting good returns again today from the UK and Irish tracks (2 meets at each). Let us know how you’ve been getting on lately.

Cheers!

Ray


Nessie123

Afternoon Ray and welcome back friend.
I’m in the Algarve all this week with the wife so not much betting for me but I’ll be back in the swing when I get back.
I have noticed some very big priced winners going in though.
Andy


sondrio2

ive noticed the same nessie, im going to have to get involved in this.


Ray Thompson

George, I’ve ran my jumps system for six years. It’s based on the old Tail End System, but sculpted to suit my requirements. It has been handicaps only, differentiating between Chases and Hurdles, and selecting ONE horse only for most races (occasionally 2, but not often) but I’ve recently been including NH flat races (bumpers) in the summer system we’ve devised here, to great success! I’m now trialing our flat selection process – backing everything showing at 16s+ on the NH, including Maidens, and it appears to be working (2 of yesterday’s 4 winners were NH, one Hcp Hdl and t’other a bumper).

Yesterday’s 4 winners were at 10/1 (16/1 EP) 25 Bf, 16/1 (22 EP) 36 Bf, 25/1 (25s EP) 40 Bf and 33/1 (from 16s EP) 55 Bf. To £2 stakes that’s a profit of £48 to ISP, £296.40 BFSP after comm.


sondrio2

thanks ray, great explanation mate.


Ray Thompson

From 76 bets yesterday at £2 each £252.70 was returned after comm by Betfair, giving a profit of £100.70. A great day, in spite of Windsor losing all 30 bets there. You needed to be on B.O.G. or early prices to get the returns I did, although more could have been made by diligent monitoring I’m sure. ISPs were crap at Salisbury with two 10/1 winners which were 18/1 and 20/1 early doors. Sedgefield had a nice 25/1 and a poor 8/1 SP after morning opening at 20s each.

I’ve got 117 bets today, which is £234 at Betfair, but it’s a while since a losing day. I know for newbies that can be a huge layout, but doing a “First & Last” bet is £90 with my selections (45 points)

Whatever you do, remember … have fun!


sondrio2

hi ray, well done for yesterday, when you say a first and last what does this mean, is it the first horse at 16/1 and the last horse with the biggest odds
thanks george


Ray Thompson

Participant
(2.24.173.246)

F+L are first and last RACE at each meeting that qualifies, George. I mentioned a few times earlier here that for nervous beginners it’s a good way to have less bets but still produce steady profits. By some quirk the F+L come up with more of the bigger priced winners than stats would suggest, but remember this is only in the first and last few weeks of the season.


Ray Thompson

I just HAD to tempt fate didn’t I? “It’s been awhile since a losing day”, I said on Tuesday and good ol’ Fate saw a chance to seriously bite my arse, which she did!
Two losing days in a row is not fun. Sorry Fate, I remorsefully apologize and plead with you to make things nice again…

Your first 30 days for just £1

Ray Thompson

Thank you Fate for making things nice again! A handful of good-sized prices meant we’re back on track with a profit that cancelled out the two losing days and upped the bank a bit. LOTS to look at today and I’m quite late starting after a slight family trauma we had to sort out.

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Champions Day at Ascot. Although it’s only in its 5th year there’s an interesting coincidence, possibly a trend, worth looking at. In its inaugural year, 2011, the only winning outsider came in the last race (4.45) at 18/1. In 2012 there were no outsider winners. 2013 the first (1.45) was won by a 20/1 shot, the 2.55 by a 16/1 and while the last (4.45) was won by a 12/1, the next four home were all big prices. Last year the only outsider win was again in the last at 20/1, 2nd was 25/1 and 3rd 33/1.

Yesterday I was three points down (£6) from three wins, one of which was a jumps selection, East Hill at 20/1 (25 EP, 42 BF), so not too bad. The other two were Mukaynis 16/1 (25) at Haydock and late one at Wol, Captain George 20/1 (34) in the 7.20.

Enjoy today! Lots to look at!


Ray Thompson

I’m only doing the first and last races at Ascot, but … further hints on the day: The same venues today as previous years show a plethora of outsiders, and some obvious filters to find them. Check these out:

2011: Cat 5.50 (LAST race) won by a 25/1 shot. Cork FIRST race 2.35 W16/1. Kel 2.45 W25/1, 5.40 (LAST!) 14/1, but opened at 16/1
2012: Cat 4.00 W16/1, 5.15 W14/1 but op. 16/1. Cork 4.50 W20/1. Wol 6.20 W16/1, 6.50 W12/1 but op. 18/1
2013: Cat 1.20 (FIRST) W16/1, op. 25/1. Kel 2.45 W28/1, 3.55 W12/1 op 18/1. Wol 6.20 W28/1, 6.50 W18/1
2014: Cor 3.15 W33/1. Kel 5.40 (LAST) 16/1 op 20/1. Wol 5.45 (FIRST) 50/1, 9.15 (LAST) 14/1 op 18/1

Every little helps!


Ray Thompson

We’ve had no broadband signal since last weekend but it’s up and working again now (still with minor glitches). It was a hardship, but I managed to struggle to the pub with my notebook and access their wi-fi in order to put my bets on. Yesterday was a cracking day for me with seven winners giving a profit of £302 after commission. We won the pub quiz last night (3rd week running!) for £18 each, then my ticket came up to attempt to “open the box” and wow! I picked the correct key (from 8) and took the £107 (usually more, but it was last won only three weeks ago).

Must go and sort today’s bets, and I have a dental appointment at noon 🙁

Back soon.


Ray Thompson

Participant
(2.24.172.40)

We’re getting into the jumps season soon and with four fences ‘n’ hedges venues today it’s time to look for outsider winners in this genre.

Since beginning my research into Flat Turf and All-Weather systems, I’ve come to realise that our system applies even MORE to jump selections. Whereas previously I was choosing one possible winner from each Chase and Hurdle handicap with the criteria that a minimum of eight runners was required, that I sorted horses for courses (left/right handed), that the form indicated previous ability on the track (C&D or a preference for running at that venue under similar Going, Weight and Rating), that the minimum industry price of 16/1 was essential, that the Betfair price would be 50+% greater than that of the bookie (e.g. 16/1 to be 24/1, or ’25’) and so forth. It was time consuming but effective. Now, we’ve got the lazy way – blanket bet the outsiders with a minimum of filtering or fuss.

Today I’ve invested in 11 animals at Carlisle – five of which are in the 4.25. Crl is in small profit over the last five years of +£25 over Chase handicaps and £110 over Hurdle hcps.
At Ludlow I’m well in profit with +£105 Chs hcps and +£335 Hdls and I have four selections: Johnny’s Legacy 25/1 (50) in the 4.45, and Air Of Glory 33/1 (70), Hill Fort 20/1 (32) and Easy Does It 40/1 (80) in the last (5.15). I should point out that the prices in brackets are my asking prices, if not met they become BFSP at the off.
Southwell isn’t my best track, but it’s down only 1 point (£5) over five years from 110 bets! I’ve fifteen here today, the majority being five in the 3.35
Thurles is very negative at a loss of £150 Chs and £35 Hdl, but I’m chancing 6 in the 3.50, 6 in the 4.50 and three in the last – Massini Boy, Small Batt’s Boy and Derrygereen Girl.
While I’m doing the blanket coverage bit, I’m sticking to £2 bets until I’m sure it works. Meantime, I’ll do a backwards look at all my jumps bets over the years and let you know my conclusion, but that will take time as I also have other things to do!

A further 19 bets tonight at Chelmsford completes my outlay

Navan saved the day yesterday with three in a row – the 3.50, 4.25 and 5.00.

Have fun! 🙂


Nessie123

Morning Ray,
Are you still playing the flat turf or is it too late in the season?
Andy


Ray Thompson

Still playing the flat turf and the all-weather Andy. 89 bets today: 26 at sunny Donny, 29 at Nby, and 17 at each of this evening’s A/W courses! This will continue until the end of the flat season around the 10th Nov.

Time for me to go join my Friday Club at the Regal Cinema Bar! Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Three jumps meetings today, Aintree is one of my top earners over Handicap Chases (although mainly in Dec, Mar and Apr) with a post-commission profit to £5 bets of +£755.25 from 48 races. Hurdles are borderline at a 9 points loss from 49 bets, and no real stats yet for new bets on NHS Flat races. Eight £2 bets here today in two H/C Chases and one Flat:
2.30 Mwaleshi 16/1
3.30 Lord Ben 16/1, Brave Spartacus 16/1 and Surf And Turf 25/1
4.35 Handpicked 16/1, Kalaniti 40/1, Lady Of Llanarmon 25/1 and Rock Chick Supremo 16/1

14 bets at Galway which is handier on this Summer jumping thing than the actual Jump Season! Post-comm profits of £47.50 on chases and £190 from hurdles.

Wincanton is very poor on Chases and only +£47.75 from 97 hurdles bets. I’ve done four in the first (1.40) and three in the last (4.45). Both hurdles!

On the flat, we have lovely left-handed Leopardstown today where I’ve covered almost all feasible outsiders in the 12.50, 1.20, 3.55 and 4.25. Huge fields means 23 bets on.

I’ve got my crosses fingered and told the stakes to go forth and multiply… 🙂


Ray Thompson

62 bets yesterday returned 61.75 points after commission! Oh dear, a whole 50p thrown away gambling!

83 bets today – 24 at Kempton, the only right-handed all-weather course in the UK; 18 at Nottingham (6 winners here last Oct at 32, 40, 60, 180, 55 and 25), 7 at Fakenham, but not expecting much there, 19 at Chelmsford and 15 at Dundalk.


Ray Thompson

Two winners at Nott, two at Kem and one biggie at Cfd returned a post-comm £412.30 for 83 £2 bets, a profit on the day of £246.30. Love it!

Two A/W today, Cfd again and Lingfield, 14 and 24 bets; then three jumps meetings: Sed is £65 in profit over Chase course, and borderline over Hurdles at zero% currently. I’ve done first and last races (hdls) and the 1.30 and 3.00 (both H/C chases). Clonmel is the opposite with +£225 over hurdles and a small loss of -£15 on Chases, so my money is spread over two Maidens and three H/C Hurdles. Stratford is +£350 over Chases and minus £160 over hdls, so three chases and a Maiden have my dosh today.

Just to reiterate: I’m doing £2 win bets on all selections at the moment, including Jumps where I’ve increased the selections from one bet (very seldom two) at each race, to all contenders over 16/1 ISP, and dropped my stake from £5 to £2 per horse.

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson

Hi, guys! Another good day yesterday. Three winners, all good prices all day on Betfair, returned 275.50 after comm. take away the stakes £146 (3 N/Rs) and I’m left with +£129.50.

Today’s jumps venues are Down Royal, +£150 Chs, +£165 Hdls. I’ve done five in the 2.40H, two in the 3.50Ch and two in the 4.25Flat
Uttox is +£525 Hdls, minus £10 chasers (2 bets down). I’m investing in the hurdle races at 12.45 and 3.35, plus the Maiden at 1.50
Wetherby is down 12 points currently. Not a lot and can return into profit anytime, so I’m on the hurdles at 1.40 and 4.00 and the 3.25 chase

Newmarket is our Flat racing friend and top earner, hence 19 outsider bets there today

The A/W continues to please (2 of yesterday’s 3 winners were A/W) so I’m on 23 at Dundalk and 12 at Wolves.

Play nice and be happy!


Ray Thompson

BOO! Let’s hope the Saturday Curse is lifted for Halloween. And we do have some ghouls, ghosties and even a couple of Luna(r) ticks (geddit?!?) in the betting boxes.

Only Newmarket again for the flat turf, and after a lovely 33/1 (80+) from there yesterday, we gotta go again with 11 bets (including Lunar Deity for the 2.35)

One A/W at Wolves where 15 selections go – including the Spirit (woooo!) Of Gondree 33/1 with some Black Truffle 20/1 *yuk*. Wol did nothing for us yesterday but good ol’ Dundalk graced our bank balance with THREE winners. Overall profit after commission was £176.40 to £2 stakes.

Nothing from the jumps yesterday and there are another four meetings today:
Ascot, good on H/C Chases to the tune of +£460.75 a/c. I’ve got three in the 1.45, two in the 2.15 and five in the 3.25 big field. They are the h/c Chases plus the last at 3.55 is a flat race, so three picks in that.

Ayr is very similar with Chases profitable to £465 a/c. I’ve done nine here today – two chases, a Maiden hurdle and the last is a Flat.

Dro produced a 50/1 winner at this meeting a year ago (Nov 1st was the Saturday). I was a bit surprised that they had nothing yesterday, but crosses fingered for 12 qualifiers today. Down Royal is equally good over Chs and Hdls to +£299.25 a/c.

Wetherby’s slightly in the red and prefers the spring races but I’m chancing a bet in the 3.40 (Vodka Wells mmmm) and a couple in the last.

Now where did I put my clown mask and the chloroform bottle and rag… 🙂


Ray Thompson

Well, the Saturday curse remains and a chunk of the profits was taken but today is another jumps Sunday and although there are four meetings, Cork and Naas have never been good for outsiders whereas right-handers Carlisle and Huntingdon are profitable in both disciplines, H/C Chs and Hdl, although today at Hun there are fewer H/Cs than usual and some small fields.

Crl 2.35HC Chicago Outfit 25/1 (50 = my asking/fishing price on Betfair)
Crl 3.10HH Milborough 50/1 (100), Big Water 20/1 (36), Lexi’s Boy 22/1 (36), Octagon 33/1 (70), Vendor 20/1 (32)
Crl 4.15Flat Thiepval 33/1 (70), The Phantom 20/1 (32), Kalaharry 16/1 (24)

Hun 4.00HH Black Lily 22/1 (36), Ballochmyle 40/1 (80), Little Window 18/1 (30)

On a positive note, I won a litre bottle of Jack Daniels down the pub for my scary zombie outfit and my ghoulfriend – a shrunken beady-eyed skeleton on a stick who danced wonderfully with me. Home made too. Pics on facebook shortly. 🙂


Ray Thompson

A second and three thirds didn’t really brighten my day yesterday.

3 jumps venues in action today. I’m leaving Kempton well alone as it’s yet to produce a winner for my original system (-£90 to 18 £5 bets). It might actually do better with the newly improved system of more bets and £2 stakes but I’m waiting to see it happen first! Ludlow is one of the top earners (+£440 over H/C Chases and Hurdles); nine selections here today. Plumpton is +£250 over hurdles but slightly down on chases, but I’m including selections in the 2.10 chase today as both Lud and Plu are positive at this time of year.

Plu 1.20 MH Guaracha 50/1, Montechito 33/1, Normandy King 66/1 and Cantor 66/1
Plu 2.20 HH King’s Road 25/1, Novalhas 22/1 and Hawk Gold 80/1
Plu 4.00 HH Uranox 18/1, Watchmetail 18/1 and Walk Of Gleams 50/1

Lud 1.40 HH Just Skittles 66/1, Shades Of Navy 33/1
Lud 2.10 HC Newton Geronimo 18/1, Jackthejourneyman 16/1
Lud 2.40 HH Take A Break 20/1
Lud 3.10 HC Carhue 22/1
Lud 3.50 HC What About Molly 16/1
Lud 4.20 Flat Trans Express 20/1, Annie’sboydave 100/1

Good things come to he who waits 🙂

Genesis of a Betting System (Part 4)

We reach Part 4 in this mammoth series and, as we move into September 2015 with the Sinister System squad, things are hotting up with a new variant, the First and Last...

Part 1 can be read here, Part 2 here, and Part 3 here

**


Ray Thompson

2014 September results produced 35 wins within the parameters previously suggested, plus 9 winning races which fell foul of the exclusion of top two and bottom weights in handicaps (4) and maidens with odds-on favourites (5). This suggests some possible changes which I’ll come to after these figures for the month.

745 bets on flat turf handicaps supplied 24 winners which gave a return of 501 points at bookies’ SP, a loss of 204 pts (less with b.o.g. but a loss nevertheless). Betfair was little better with a return of 765, but 5% comm brought that down to 726.25 – a loss of 18.75 points. Overall, not good, but it helps me see improvements.

Maidens brought a better result, with a lot less bets and, again, some probable improvements. Exactly 300 bets returned 11 winners (not counting the excluded five mentioned in paragraph one). The return at SP would have been 343, a 43 points profit. Betfair was 644, or after comm 611.80, a whopping 311.80 points profit.

There were also 66 maiden bets where the race contained an odds-on fave. With one 33/1 winner this left an SP loss of 32 and a 6 point loss at BSP

I’m gonna sort out today’s bets now but I’ll be back with some more interesting stuff… have fun!


Ray Thompson

Another profitable day yesterday from Granny May if you got the early 70 at Betfair, or even the 33/1 at your bookies, but my heart goes out to any of you who still wait until closer to the off before putting your bet on. 12/1 it won at. Say no more.

I’ve been really busy sussing out the September stuff, so without further ado, let me introduce you to the “Magic Maidens” (copyright and trademark in the works 🙂 :

The really good news is that last September (2014) there were 49 Maiden races containing an odds-on favourite. Those races are absolutely useless to us in that by NOT betting on the contenders (16/1+) in those races, a huge amount of our money gets saved.

LESSON: Don’t put money on ANY race (Maiden or Handicap) that has an odds-on or evens or 11/10 fave. Yes, you’ll get the odd winner here and there, but you definitely will not make a long-term profit backing the usual suspects.

If I break the Maidens down into Maiden Stakes, Maiden Fillies/Mares, Maiden Colts/Geldings and Maiden Auctions, we get the following:

Maiden Stakes: 47 runners, 4 winners at 22/1 (36), 16/1 (25), 33/1 (60) and 16/1 (22). At early, b.o.g., and Betfair greater odds were to be had, but with those four basic prices the returns were 91SP, 143BSP, profits of 44 and 96 points

Maiden Fillies: 25 runners, 4 winners at 66/1 (150), 50/1 (95), 20/1 (34) and 25/1 (40). Basic returns were 171SP, 324BSP, profits of 146 and 299 points

Maiden C & G: 12 runners, 1 winner at 33/1 (40), profits of 33 and 39 points

Maiden Auctions: 15 runners, 1 win at 25/1 (38), profits of 25 and 37 points

And as a bonus – nowt to do with maidens – I mentioned some time ago and probably more than once that NH Flat races seem to pop up the occasional biggies. Here’s last September’s results: 19 runners, 3 winners at 40/1 (80), 33/1 (65) and 22/1 (38),
profits of 95 and 183 points

How’s THAT for a system? 343 at SP or 574 from Betfair in a month IS possible. Let’s hope this year’s September is at least equally generous.

Enjoy AND have fun!!!


Ray Thompson

By the way, before you ask, yes I’ll be pursuing flat turf handicaps here shortly, but for now I need to get today’s bets on!


catziis

This looks interesting Ray…. as a newbie that’s just found these posts, reading through 165 of ’em is going to be a bit daunting, but it looks tasty enough to start reading…. it’ll take me a week to get through ’em all, so don’t go away…..

Terry


Ray Thompson

Bukle was a nice winner yesterday at 32, 30.4 after comm. Another profitable day.

Hi, Terry, welcome aboard. You’ll only have to skim the earlier posts to see what we set out to attain, and the great achievement posted yesterday!

Handicaps for September last year are taking me a while to collate, but I’m targeting weight/position on race card, Age, Class, Going, Distance and a nod towards stall bias. If you Google “draw bias at (name of track)” you’ll find charts by distance, going (only G-GS, but that’s okay) and number of runners, all the things you guys suggested we incorporate into the search for winners. The only other thing, number of contenders (16/1 to 66/1 for Maidens, 16/1 to 40/1 Handicaps), I can fall back on my main area of NHS outsiders to comment on. By looking at ALL contenders, firstly the Sinister/Dexter rule is a good place to start with handicaps. Where the race isn’t a straight 5,6,7 or 8 furlongs the curve of the track, left or right, can save you backing against the contender’s preference. That, and a serious look at the trainer’s ability in handicaps, especially with first time out horses. Jockey/trainer combinations, the draw, your favourite colour if you must! (Please no). They should allow you to whittle away the real no-hopers and find a maximum of three for races with up to around 10-12 runners, and no more than FIVE for the real big fields of around 20+.

The first week of September 2014 tells me there were 6 winners at 20/1, 16/1, 33/1, 18/1, 20/1 and 20/1 again. I should point out here that one of the criteria for selections is the ISP, the Industry’s book as compiled by their so-called experts. Please don’t even consider trying to find a system based on Exchange (Betfair) prices. It can’t be done, simply because of the rapid fluctuations online, where you’re backing/laying against other punters. Betfair only gains a 5% commission from winning bets and the odds you see are there via automatic alteration with every bet/lay made. And THAT is why you can get such MASSIVE prices with them.

Other things of note from the first week are:
A. 2 wins from 2yos, 1 win each from 3,4,5 and 6+ year olds.
B. 2 wins from Class 3, 1 from C4 and 3 from C5/6. There are more C5/6 than 1,2,3 and 4 combined.
C. 3 wins on GS, 2 on GF and just 1 on Good. There are more races on Good going than GF and GS combined.
D. 1 win over 5f, 3 at 6f and 2 at 10f

That’s it for now. Tell me what you think. Author Douglas Adams said that the number 42 is the answer to everything. I hope today he’s right because that’s how many selections I’m on (with Betfair, of course!)

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

I seem to have lost yet another post. My ‘puter absolutely froze yesterday and I had to switch the whole kit and caboodle off. Seems okay today but it’s definitely going into the computer hospital soon as poss for a good clean out. Anyway, to business…

Doncaster and St Leger Fest is great fun; I used to go regularly back when I was (a) young and sprightly and (b) working and living in the Nor’east.

Donny’s a tricky track but the stats are there nevertheless.

First of all, forget any kind of system we’ve developed over the last few weeks, as it simply does not happen like this at Sunny Donny. It’s a bit like one of the infinite parallel worlds described in mathematical detail recently by a number of scientists of the Quantum Mechanics ilk. However, some things – as with all parallel worlds – are the same as ours, particularly in the mathematics arena. In this case, the draw is very important, especially when it comes to the straight mile vs the round mile (and longer):

Let’s list ’em all for simplicity:

5 and 6f – high draw favoured and horses with a liking for middle to up with the pace running.

7f High draw and middle-to-hold-up horses.

8f Straight – High draw and particularly on the rail with middle to hold-up being most successful.

8f Round – High draw again and although it’s a left hander there’s little or no bias to the inside (low) draw.

12f+ lead-to-middle runners do best and weirdly, from the high draw (Stand side) and middle.

The big priced winners at Legerfest pop in ANY kind of race, but seldom those with a 6/5 or less favourite. Depending on the going, there can be quite a lot of odds-on shots running, like last year when it was Good to Soft generally. I’ve cast an eye over the last five years here to see if we can still make a profit from outsiders and offer you this:

2010 Day 1 (Wed) 25/1 in a nursery and 22/1 in a conditions Stakes. Only one contender (16/1 to 33/1) in the first and two in the second. Both at 40+ available via Betfair.
Day 3 (Fri) 20/1 (50BSP!) in a handicap (7 contenders)
Day 4 (Sat) 16/1 (25) in a Group 2 Stakes (6 contenders)
Add another 24 contenders to the 16 above for ALL races except those containing an odds-on to 6/5 fave and that’s 40 points laid out for a return of 81 (148.25 post-comm BSP)

2011 Day 2. 20/1 (30). (11 bets/contenders)
Day 3. 16/1 (28) and 16/1 (22). (9 bets)
Add 60 to the 20 contenders to cover EVERY race (not o/o-6/5) and your 80 points outlay returned a mere 55 (minus 25 🙁 but a 3.6 profit (83.60) post-comm.

2012 Day 1. 16/1 (24) (only bet) and 20/1 (32) (6 bets)
Day 2. 22/1 (34) (8 bets) and 16/1 (28) (7 bets)
Day 4. 20/1 (28) (10 bets) and 16/1 (26) (one bet)
105 bets to cover every contending race returned 116 (+11) and 163.40 (+58.40 post comm)

2013 Day 2. a non-contending 100/1 winner (475+) boo-hoo!
Day 3. 18/1 (28) (1 bet)
Day 4. 16/1 (28) 11 bets and 20/1 (32) (only contender)
78 bets to cover all racing returned 57 (minus 21) and 83.60 after comm (plus 5.6)

2014 Day 1. 25/1 (38) (11 bets)
Day 4. 16/1 (24) (5 bets)
124 bets to cover every qualifying race returned 43 (minus 81) and 58.90 (-61.5)

2013 and 2014 were Good to Soft, 2012 GF then Good, 2011 and 2010 Good. This year it’s Good again and the first race has just banged in a 25/1 winner!

Have fun, hope the going stays good and remember NOT to back the contenders that don’t qualify via the draw bias or any with faves odds-on, 11/10 or 6/5

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson

Has everyone gone to Donny? Or just nothing to say/share?

Good day yesterday with Show Legend returning 25/1, 38+ BSP.
My buddy The Captain says I should have emphasized that profits seen in previous years could easily have been maximised (and losses reversed or shortened) by using the draw bias and pace stats to eliminate the no-hopers. I’ve got 22 runners in the first five and the last races at Donny today. One win at the minimum 16/1 will show a profit on the day because my minimum bet on Betfair is 26.

Have fun!


Steve Walmsley

Hi Ray,

Not wishing to over critical but:

“7f High draw and middle-to-hold-up horses.”

Yesterdays result:

Show Legend – Drawn 3

Comments: Made all, pushed along 2f out and pressed, ridden inside final furlong, held on towards finish.

Completely contrary to the filters you have suggested for Doncaster?

Personally, since you first proposed the “Outsider Principle” I have taken the simplistic approach of backing everything in Handicaps at BFSP (top weight excluded) listed between 16 and 33 on the Sporting Life website at approx 12:30 daily.

My rationale is that the inherent edge built in to your idea (the occasionally massive increased returns from BF) is potentially negated by applying too many filters that will miss the complete shock results. Allied to this is the time required to plough through multiple handicaps on those days with half a dozen meetings.

Just for the record, sticking to £2 bets I am currently showing a profit of £470

Thanks very much for the original idea, my regular betting is based around following handicappers with proven winning form, set to perform under their ideal conditions. Afraid I am from the Clive Holt school of betting from the eighties. Reading the formbook every week to compile my lists, with suitable notes is a complete pain. This method is just so much fun – Look at prices, place bets, look again at the end of the day.


sondrio2

hi steve, just as a matter of interest you say you back everything at 16 – 33 at 12-30 to bfsp in h/caps as shown in the sportinglife, how many selections are you backing per day, obviously working for you with the profit you’ve made.
cheers george


Steve Walmsley

Just ran a quick search on settled bets for the last 30 days there were 1239 bets, across 368 Markets

So an average of 40 per day. I think the most on any one day was in the region of 100.

Net profit £273.89 for an ROI of 11%

Not bad for almost thought free betting.

Probably also worth noting that the biggest downswing was a loss of £280 across 30 markets, in the middle of August. So it can be fairly volatile.


sondrio2

not bad at all steve, thanks for sharing.

Ray Thompson

Hi Steve, quite right about yesterday’s draw bias not working at all, but it IS a bias rather than a rule or law. You’ll see in the earlier posts that my original was similar to your findings, and that I mentioned the other day the importance of the betting forecast – in my case with The Racing Post – for selections rather than trying to base anything on BSP alone.

My post yesterday said my minimum win from 22 bets would suffice, and it did indeed with one N/R and Mr Lupton winning at a mere 10/1. My 24.7 after tax and stake return left me a small profit of 3.7 points. I missed Realtra in my haste to “save money”, but as we’ve observed, the really big money is found during the early weeks of the system, with a huge bias to bigger (50+) Betfair prices in Maidens (last year 50, 50,130,50,120,65,180,140,50,75,200,70,55,70,150,120,75,50,50,200,95,60,60,50, 150,200,100,50,620,80,63,60,430,260,150,60,152,55,55,65,75,60) than Handicaps.

My 28th July post showed the difference between filtered and unfiltered during a specific period. Overall, a few mini-systems or (ir)regularities can be used for filters, one I mentioned last month being that all winners except two at the Curragh last year were either 16/1 or 20/1.

Please stick with us Steve, we need more people like yourself with an eye for good stats and a clear understanding of what I’m trying to achieve here.

Today, 23 bets from me, most races at Donny, Handicaps at Sandown and Chester and three biggies in Salisbury’s 7.30 Maiden.

Remember to have fun!


Ray Thompson

Two nice winners at Bath yesterday (Miss Minuty and Saint Lucy) kept the profits up.

Today I’ve got 12 runners at Brighton (five of them in the 4.00) and my NHS system suggests Maller Tree in the 2.50 at Strat. and in the 3.50 Minella Bliss and Lady Of Longstone but only minimum bets as they’re racing out of the jumps season.

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson

Pinch A Kiss was as a nice starter on Monday at 25/1, I’d taken an early 36 at Betfair and that was the only winner for me. Two non-runners was a shame, but still a healthy profit on the day. Yesterday I drew a blank, having had high expectations of the qualifiers but that’s how things happen.

Couple of NRs already today from my picks and prices could be better at some tracks, but I am expecting a decent return on my investment and I’m still collating more info every day to ultimately see the big picture on flat turf outsiders.

Back soon.


Ray Thompson

Things definitely quieting off now, but here’s a low stakes/high return system that I’ve ironed out over 2010-2014 inclusive – 5 years of profit. And then a bonus!

Beginning each year on the Saturday of the Ayr meeting and including all turf flat races at all courses (i.e. not the all-weather, but yes to NH flat) and backing ONLY in the first and last race at each venue except when the race contains an odds-on to 6/5 favourite, here are each year’s results of 16/1+ winners:

2010 this day to END OF SEPTEMBER: 67 races returned 250 points to SP!!!

2011 ditto: 72 races returned 270 points to SP!!!

2012 ditto: 42 races returned 72 points to SP!

2013 ditto: 56 races returned 180 points to SP!!!

2014 ditto: 64 races returned 159 points to SP!!!

Imagine what Betfair paid! There’s more! Jumps races also came good with this system, also through to end of September:

2010: 33 races returned 174 points to SP!!!

2011: 35 races returned 110 points to SP!!!

2012: 22 races returned 42 points to SP!

2013: 21 races returned 55 points to SP!!!

2014: 22 races returned 102 points to SP!!!

Think what you’re going to do when you put these together. That’s right, you’re going to make money. Now nobody can be expected to pick the winner outright in these races, but by selective application of standout observations during the collating of the results over that five year period, we can whittle down our selections to a manageable number. This afternoon or early evening, I’ll have a list up for you of the best and worst days each year (2012 was down to hideous weather and therefore becomes a bit of an anomaly). I’ll mention now though that the 1st day of each year (a Saturday equivalent to today) went as follows:

NO JUMP selections have won over the five years on this first day, so just concentrate on FLAT TURF (incl. Flat NH):

Saturdays: Apart from 2011 where 6 races did zilch, ALL other Saturdays produced winners.

Have fun!


MrsSponge

Thanks for all this Ray. Looks interesting. Will definitely keep my eye on it.


Ray Thompson

Sorry I couldn’t post up the rest of the month pointers yesterday, grandson came to stay while mom (my daughter) went off up to London to see Florence and The Machine. However, each day’s results coming up. Great day yesterday with First and Last (Henceforth “F&L”) popping in at Ayr with a 50/1 winner (150 BSP!) and Nmk finishing with a 16/1 shot (27 BSP). If you also followed everything at Ayr as suggested, you had Shaden 16/1 (30) and Tatlisu 18/1 (28) to add to the bank.

Each year from Saturday of Ayr Gold Cup (DAY 1) to end of month had a different number of days of course, with 2010 at 13 days, 2011 14 days, 2012/9, 2013/10 and 2014/11.

2010 Day 1 – 2 jumps races returned zero, 10 others returned 34 points at ISP

Your first 30 days for just £1

2010 Day 2 (today!) 4 Jumps races returned 67 points; 3 others returned 0. ***After this day ZERO jumps returned from 4 races (16 in all) in each year’s Day 2.***

2010 Day 3 (Monday) 2 Jumps rtn 47 pts; 2 others rtn zero

2010 Day 4 (Tues) 2 Jumps rtn 0; 4 others rtn 21

2010 Day 5 (Wed) 3 Jumps rtn 0; 5 others rtn 0

2010 Day 6 (Thur) 3 Jump rtn 34; 2 others rtn 0

2010 Day 7 (Fri) 2 Jumps rtn 26; 4 others rtn 21

2010 Day 8 (Sat) 4 J rtn 0; 8 others rtn 38

2010 Day 9 (Sun) 4 J rtn 0; 7 others rtn 38

2010 Day 10 (M) 2 J rtn 0; 5 others rtn 0

2010 Day 11 (Tu) 2 J rtn 0; 3 others rtn 0

2010 Day 12 (W) 3 J rtn 0; 9 others rtn 38

2010 D13 (30th) 0 Jumps races; 5 others rtn 60

Coming up: other years filtered.

Must look at my selections now and do the thing with them… 🙂


Ray Thompson

2011 Day 2 (today) 4 Jumps races rtn 0; 6 other races rtn 17 pts

2011 Day 3 (Mon) 2 J rtn 0; 5 other rtn 0

2011 Day 4 (Tu) 2 J rtn 0; 2 other rtn 142 pts

2011 Day 5 (W) 4 J rtn 21; 5 other rtn 0

2011 Day 6 (Th) 4 J rtn 47; 6 other rtn 17

2011 Day 7 (F) 3 J rtn 0; 6 others rtn 23

2011 Day 8 (Sat) 3 rtn 0; 9 others rtn 0

2011 Day 9 (Sun) 2 rtn 0; 6 others rtn 17

2011 Day 10 (M) 2 rtn 0; 7 other rtn 0

2011 Day 11 (Tu) 2 rtn 0; 4 others rtn 0

2011 Day 12 (W) 2 rtn 0; 9 rtn 0

2011 Day 13 (Th) 2 rtn 21; 2 others rtn 55

2011 Day 14 (F) 5 rtn 21; 3 others rtn 0
………………………………………..
2012 Day 1 (Sat) 2 J rtn 0; 7 other rtn 51;

2012 Day 2 (today) 4 J rtn 0; 2 other rtn 21

2012 Day 3 (Mon) 2 J rtn 0; 6 other rtn 0

2012 Day 4 (Tu) 2 J rtn 21; 4 other rtn 0

2012 Day 5 (W) 3 J rtn 21; 3 others rtn 0

2012 Days 6 – 9 incl. 9 J rtn 0; 19 other 0
……………………………………..
2013 Day 1 (Sat) 2 J rtn 0; 9 others rtn 63

2013 Day 2 (today) 4 J rtn 0; 4 others rtn 0

2013 Day 3 (Mon) 0 J races; 6 others rtn 21

2013 Day 4 (Tu) 3 J rtn 0; 4 others rtn 58

2013 Day 5 (W) 2 J rtn ); 4 others rtn 0

2013 Day 6 (Th) 0 races; 6 others rtn 0

2013 Day 7 (F) 4 J rtn 38; 6 others rtn 0

2013 Day 8 (Sat) 3 J rtn 0; 6 others rtn 38

2013 Day 9 (Sun) 0 races; 5 others rtn 0

2013 Day 10 (M) 1 J rtn 17; 6 others rtn 0
……………………………………….
2014 Day 1 (Sat) 2 J rtn 0; 7 others rtn 26

2014 Day 2 (Sun) 4 J rtn 0; 8 others rtn 0

2014 Day 3 (M) 0 J races; 4 others rtn 0

2014 Day 4 (Tu) 2 J rtn 0; 7 others rtn 0

2014 Day 5 (W) 2 J rtn 0; 4 others rtn 55

2014 Day 6 (Th) 2 J rtn 81; 4 others rt 0

2014 Day 7 (F) 3 J rtn 21; 4 others rtn 0

2014 Day 8 (Sat) 2 J rtn 0; 9 others rt 34

2014 Day 9 (Sun) 0 races; 5 others rtn 21

2014 Day 10 (M) 2 J rtn 0; 5 other rtn 23

2014 Day 11 (Tu) 3 J rtn 0; 7 others rtn 0
…………………………………….

And that’s yer lot me hearties!! Pick the bones out of ’em and report back to me with changes and/or filters as soon as yer like after sparrowfart termorra. Arr, me boys, there be lots of treasure in them thar stats!


Ray Thompson

No takers, eh? Well, here’s some great news; as I said very early on this thread, beginning and end of the season are more likely to produce outsiders than the middle of season. I’m compiling the last five years of OCTOBER now (and start of Nov, but it’s only a few days in until the official last day of the flat (always the day of the November Cup at Doncaster). We’ve seen how the start of the season went, the last few weeks should be equally profitable or even a lot better.

I’ll get the rest of the figures out here as soon as I’ve completed them.

Stay happy!


Ray Thompson

The Autumn Equinox on 22/23 September each year appears to be about the start of the deterioration of winners at the popular end of the betting forecasts (and actual prices at the off) as more and more outsiders make their presence felt. There are also some big fields, which in turn mean a lot of contenders in each race. It’s difficult to find filters when a single 100/1 win every month or so returns high hundreds – and even 1,000/1 plus at Betfair. To catch these huge outsiders means having to bet on every eligible nag in every race, but as you’ll see, this need not be too painful once your bank is up and running. Yesterday for instance, I had a nerve-wracking afternoon after I’d placed 75 bets on at £2 each at Betfair. £150 is a lot to part with when there are so many races/runners on the day. However, my confidence in doing that was restored by the end of racing with five winners returning exactly double my original stake. Well, actually, after 5% commission was removed it was £285 added to my account, but still a decent £135 profit.

Anyway, let’s get ourselves into my TARDIS and I’ll take you for a spin back to 2010 for a look at the returns from all races containing contenders for the big prize. After my discoveries on this trip through time and race(s) I’ve seen things mere mortals could only dream of! Oh, hang on a mo’, erm, that was actually Roy Blatty in Blade Runner wasn’t it? Back to reality *cough*, and my decision to split First + Last (FL* on the grid) from Maidens, Handicaps, All-Weather and NH flat. You might be surprised at some of these, but you’ll recall that after specifying Flat TURF only, I mentioned a couple of times that other races (AW + NH Flat) sprang up with some massively priced winners in the first few weeks of the season. Well, they’re there at the last few weeks as well.

These are the complete results for 23rd Sept to November 6th in 2010. The First and Last are of particular interest for anyone who might be just getting into this or don’t wish to cover a whole day’s races. The F+L are indicated by an asterisk and refer to any contenders in the first and last race at each qualifying meeting of the day. I’ve some notes after these figures which will give you an idea of the sort of returns we’re looking at.Betfair prices are bracketed, and my, don’t some of them look fine!?!

2010 September 23rd: 16/1* (22), 16/1* (22), 20/1* (32). 24th: 20/1 (32), 21* (30). 25th: 20/1* (32), 20/1 (30),16/1 (24), 20/1 (32), 16/1 (24), 16/1* (25). 26th: 20/1* (32), 16/1 (22), 16/1* (23), 20/1 (32). 27th: 16/1 (46), 25/1 (42). 28th: 50/1 (70), 66/1 (140). 29th: 16/1 (24), 20/1* (32), 33/1 (240). 30th: 33/1* (65), 25/1* (40), 20/1 (32), 16/1 (25), 16/1* (26).

2010 Oct 1st: 16/1 (32), 16/1 (26), 20/1* (32), 20/1* (34), 25/1* (40), 16/1* (24), 25/1* (48) . 2nd: 20/1* (32), 16/1 (25). 3rd: 25/1* (40), 25/1 (40). 4th: 16/1* (23), 16/1* (25), 33/1* (70); 5th: 16/1* (25), 33/1 (70). 6th: 25/1 (40), 33/1 (70), 16/1 (25), 66/1* (250). 7th: 22/1* (36), 40/1 (65), 16/1 (25), 25/1* (55), 16/1* (25). 8th: 33/1 (65), 28/1 (55), 16/1 (25), 18/1 (28), 25/1 (50). 9th:

Sorry, just realised it’s my swim night; I’m sure you get the gist of this, back tomorrow to complete through to this year.


Ray Thompson

So, where were we? Ah, yes…

2010 Oct 9th: 20/1* (32), 25/1* (50), 40/1 (82), 16/1, (28). 10th: 25/1 (40), 28/1 (120), 20/1* (55), 20/1 (32), 20/1 (30). 11th : 20/1 (32), 25/1 (40), 50/1* (85), 16/1 (23). 12th: 16/1* (22). 13th: 20/1 (30), 16/1* (25), 20/1* (32), 16/1 (25), 16/1 (22), 16/1 (22). 14th: 16/1 (24), 20/1 (34), 16/1 (25), 33/1 (65), 16/1 (24), 16/1* (25). 15th: 16/1 (25), 18/1 (28), 66/1 (130). 16th: 25/1 (40), 16/1 (25), 16/1 (25). 17th: 20/1 (32), 16/1* (25), 25/1* (38), 22/1 (36), 25/1 (40). 18th: 22/1 (34), 20/1* (32), 20/1* (34). 19th: 16/1 (24), 20/1 (38), 20/1 (32), 16/1 (23), 25/1* (50). 20th: 33/1 (55), 20/1 (30). 21st: 16/1* (25), 33/1* (55), 40/1* (80). 22nd: 33/1 (65), 16/1* (25). 23rd: 16/1 (24), 28/1 (48), 33/1* (50). 24th: 50/1* (100), 25/1 (40), 28/1 (42). 25th: 16/1 (23), 25/1 (36). 26th: 33/1 (65), 20/1* (50), 33/1 (200), 16/1* (40). 27th: 16/1* (20), 20/1 (32), 20/1 (32). 28th: 25/1 (48), 16/1 (34), 25/1* (60), 66/1 (140), 33/1 (55), 25/1 (36), 16/1* (32). 29th: 80/1* (120), 16/1 (22), 16/1 (24), 16/1 (25), 16/1 (24), 200/1 (1,000) Yes, REALLY!), 22/1 (36). 31st: 20/1 (32), 16/1 (24).

Nov 1st: 20/1* (28). 2nd: 40/1* (85). 3rd: 33/1 (40), 22/1* (40), 20/1* (30). 4th: 16/1* (25), 20/1 (34). 5th: 16/1 (20), 16/1 (25), 16/1 (22). 6th: 20/1 (45), 16/1 (22), 18/1 (28), 33/1* (160), 25/1 (40), 18/1 (25). 2011 next.

85 bets yesterday (£170) returned 254.60 after comm, a profit on the day of £84.90 from three winners. Great, innit? 🙂

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Seven winners yesterday gave back profits of 49 pts SP and 130.15 (£260.30) after comm at Betfair.

2011 Sept 23rd: 16/1 (25), 22/1* (50), 20/1 (32). 24th: 20/1 (30), 25/1 (40), 40/1 (60), 16/1 (25). 25th: 16/1* (65), 25/1 (40), 16/1 (22). 26th: 20/1 (32), 20/1 (32). 28th: 16/1 (25), 16/1 (23), 16/1 (25), 16/1 (24). 29th: 33/1* (44), 18/1 (30), 20/1* (30), 20/1 (32), 16/1 (24). 30th: 22/1* (44), 25/1 (50), 20/1 (32), 20/1* (36).

Oct/Nov to follow…


Ray Thompson

…..and concluding 2011.

Oct 1st: 20/1* (30), 16/1 (32), 16/1 (24), 25/1* (40), 33/1* (60), 28/1* (50). 3rd: 18/1* (28), 16/1 (24). 4th: 16/1* (25), 16/1 (23), 20/1 (34). 5th: 16/1 (20), 20/1 (30). 6th: 25/1 (40). 7th: 25/1 (42), 28/1* (44). 8th: 25/1* (40), 25/1 (46), 20/1 (32), 25/1 (42), 20/1 (32), 20/1 (32). 9th: 20/1* (32), 25/1* (50), 40/1 (82), 16/1 (28). 10th: 18/1* (28), 16/1 (25), 33/1 (50), 28/1* (40), 40/1 (90), 16/1 (22). 11th: 25/1* (40). 12th: 16/1* (22), 28/1 (40), 16/1 (25), 25/1 (40), 20/1 (32), 40/1 (120). 13th: 16/1 (23), 16/1 (24), 33/1 (75), 20/1* (32), 20/1* (30), 16/1* (23). 15th: 18/1* (32), 25/1* (42), 16/1* (24), 16/1* (25). 16th: 16/1* (22). 17th: 16/1* (23), 16/1 (24), 16/1* (25). 19th: 20/1 (32), 16/1 (22), 20/1 (32), 25/1 (42). 20th: 25/1 (40). 21st: 33/1 (100), 16/1*(25), 33/1 (50), 20/1 (30), 28/1 (44), 16/1 (23), 25/1 (40). 22nd: 25/1 (40). 23rd: 50/1 (100), 20/1* (32). 24th: 16/1 (24), 20/1 (30), 16/1 (25), 33/1 (70). 26th: 20/1 (32), 100/1 (300), 20/1 (30), 33/1 (60), 25/1 (38). 28th: 33/1 (60), 18/1 (28), 16/1 (21). 29th: 20/1* (32), 20/1 (30), 16/1* (24), 16/1 (22).

Nov 1st: 20/1* (32). 2nd: 16/1 (22), 20/1* (32), 20/1 (32). 3rd: 16/1 (25), 16/1 (23), 22/1 (36), 40/1 (80). 4th: 16/1 (24), 50/1 (360), 22/1* (34), 22/1 (36). 5th: 20/1* (30), 16/1 (22).

I could continue with 2012, ’13 and ’14 but they’re really all quite similar, so to save time let’s go straight to the basics. For the above, we see 32 hits on F+L* only and a further 56 on Maidens, Handicaps, All-Weather and Flat NH. We’ll call them MHAF hereafter. They come down from BSPs of 360, 300, 100 etc so BIG profits.

2012 saw 44 wins F+L and 62 MHAF incl. BSPs of 200, 130, 120, 110×2, and loads more in 80s, 70s, 60s and beyond
2013 saw 37 F+L and 54 MHAF inc. BSP returns of 170, 140, 100, 95 and the rest lesser amounts down to the 20s
2014 gave 46 F+L and 52 MHAF incl. 200, 190, 100, etc. and let us not forget that 1,000 payback from Betfair in 2010 (if only we’d known then … blah blah blah)

Any questions?


Nessie123

Evening,
I’m quite new to this post so please bear with me.
I’m I looking to back any horse that is 14/1 or over in handicap flat turf races,discarding the top two weights and the bottom weight?
Is this about right for the basics?
Cheers
Andy


Ray Thompson

Hi Andy, nearly there. Any of the following that are 16/1 or greater in the bookies’ betting forecast, but put them on with Betfair, where much higher odds are achievable (see some of the results above for comparison – especially with the big prices). The top two and bottom don’t seem to be a problem in the first and final weeks of the season (which includes NOW):

All flat turf Handicaps PLUS Maidens, All-Weather, and National Hunt FLAT races (bumpers).

For folks who don’t have the time to spare (or the money initially!) I’d suggest starting with our First And Last system, which involves backing all 16/1+ horses in the F+L race at EVERY course each day (Including any jumps meetings)

Yesterday, to an outlay of 128 bets, 6 races returned PROFITS of 11 points to SP or a massive 76 points fromBetfair (£144.40 to minimum £2 stakes after commission)

I have 54 selections today, having used draw bias filters on the really big fields.

Enjoy!


sondrio2

hi ray, are there any race number criteria, or is it just any horse over 16/1 forecast price.
thanks
george


Nessie123

Ray,
Can I confirm that at this time of year to include all the weights in handicaps including top two and bottom weights? (Providing the price conforms).
Also,can I ask? A/W races, are they just the handicaps or all races included?
Cheers
Andy
PS Can anyone advise me on what sites you use to gather the relevant information?


Nessie123

Friends,
I tried this system on the Handicap races today,I had 16 bets,one winner,LIL SOPHELLA 4.10 MUSS.
Does this just about tally with what anyone else did today?
Also,where are the relevant prices coming from,the betting sites (odds checker) or the tissue prices under the racecard?
Cheers
Andy


Ray Thompson

G’day Andy and George (Were you WHAM!???). The field criteria I use is initially that the number of horses at 16/1+ should be around a third if there are lots of runners. If there are more than a third (e.g. one race today has 16 runners and ten of them are 16+) then look at the draw bias for that course and distance and apply accordingly. Search Draw Bias At … (Name of course)… and options will appear. They can be very useful in discounting the disadvantaged runners. If you’ve still got more than the third needed, then use your judgement/knowledge on which to include. I tend towards past and recent performance (Form) obviously checking out the sinister/dexter suitability of horse and course, although I know a lot of you prefer Trainer stats or trainer/jockey combos. Whichever suits you is the way to go.

AW races are all capable of producing big-priced winners. Irish courses often show HUGE differences in the SP criterion price and the actual Betfair payout with 20s coughing up 100, 16s paying 50 and so on.

I use my old familiar sites, but. I’ve begun integrating Geegeez cards and info recently as it’s been developing and it really is evolving into a superior species.

Tissue prices at the bottom of the race card are first port of call for me along with developing bookie prices alongside each runner. If, say, a runner that was 16/1 slips to 14/1 with the industry, I will still back the selection if Betfair still has 20+ about it. In all the tables above this post I’ve included winners that were 16+ISP until dropping to 14s or 12s just before or at the off.

I had only two winners yesterday: Tylery Wonder at Curragh and Lil Sophella at Muss, both handicaps. A tiny post-comm profit of £13.40. Hoping to do better today with 81 bets (£162) laid out.

Have fun!


Nessie123

Morning Ray,
Hope you had a decent day yesterday.
Can I ask you to confirm that what I am looking at is the same as you?

All flat turf handicaps and maidens.
All A/W races (regardless of what type of race).
All NHF races.
All Irish handicaps and maidens.

Cheers
Andy


Ray Thompson

Spot on there Andy. As we proceed into Oct and Nov more and more winning outsiders will become evident. Stick to the basics (more or less) and you can’t go wrong. As confidence increases with returns, soon you’ll feel like a veteran at the game as you just do everything automatically. But any questions – I’m always here.

Five winners yesterday, the first of which I’d backed in the morning as usual at 38 when the ISP was 25/1. It got seriously backed in the afternoon in to 11/1! That was Harrison Stickle. Others were Catalina’s Diamond in the last at Bath, Jacob’s Pillow at 24 when it was 16/1, won at 12/1 and Archipelago at Hamilton, and a lovely 33/1 (65 BSP early doors) at Roscommon. My profit on the day was just under £200 after comm. (£197.10).

79 bets this morning at Ayr, Fairyhouse and Wolvs AW; was more but seems to be a few non-runners today! Also a few (10) over the jumps today that I have a separate system for. If you want to keep an eye on them, here they are, but just watch as the jumps season proper doesn’t actually start until November.

Sed 2.00 HH. Mister Hendre
Sed 2.30 MH. Rocky Two
Sed 3.05 HC. Prince Blackthorn
Sth 3.30 HH. Prince Of Silver
Sed 3.40 HH. Key Account
Sth 4.05 HH. Optical High
Sed 4.15 HC. Dover The Moon
Sed 4.50 F. Kicking Lilly, Skiddaw Poppy and Knysna Bay

Have a great day!


Nessie123

Hi Ray,
I must have missed a couple yesterday,I didn’t do the Irish races ( I have today) and I also missed Catalinas Diamond.
I assume it must have been under 16/1 on the tissue prices (Sporting Life) the night before racing as I have to use these pointers because of work commitments.
I’m still happy though.
Andy


Ray Thompson

Losses from only two winners yesterday ran to £49.70 after comm. Would have been a lot more if I hadn’t taken 32 available in the morning when bookies had Lily’s Prince at 20/1 (won at 8/1). Today’s 88 picks should prove a lot better (he says worriedly *gulp!*)

Time to turn on the telly…

Genesis of a Betting System (Part 3)

Part 3 in the series, and a few strands start to come together for our system developers. If you remember from Part 1 and Part 2, they've been delving into the big-priced end of the market. Here's how things progressed through August of last year...

**


Ray Thompson

Flat Handicaps on Turf from 29/3/15. Winners ISP and (Field/Racecard Place)

(Note that 12/1 and 14 given were 16/1+ in early forecast and/or opened on track at the same 16/1+; also 40+ winners which were 33/1 in forecast and early prices)

March: 14/1 (6th of 18); 16/1 (5th of 7); 18/1 (5/18); 14/1 (5/7)

April: 16/1 (6/11); 28/1 (9/10); 25/1 (13/14); 20/1 (6/11); 20/1 (7/8); 16/1 (7/17); 20/1 (3/16); 16/1 (5/9); 25/1 (10/14); 28/1 (6/6); 14/1 (6/12); 14/1 (11/12); 14/1 (3/13); 16/1 (9/12); 18/1 (10/12); 16/1 (7/13); 33/1 (11/13); 14/1 (4/10); 25/1 (5/13); 16/1 (4/11); 16/1 (5/5); 14/1 (18/20); 16/1 (1/10); 16/1 (8/11); 20/1 (9/10); 12/1 (8/8); 16/1 (4/9).

May: 16/1 (6/9); 16/1 (2/9); 20/1 (7/10); 20/1 (2/11); 25/1 (9/9); 16/1 (7/22); 16/1 (2.10); 14/1 (4/10); 25/1 (8/16); 20/1 (17/21); 20/1 (10/11); 16/1 (5/12); 16/1 (8/13); 25/1 (6.10); 20/1 (10/14); 25/1 (9/11); 50/1 (9/16); 14/1 (11/17); 50/1 (3/11); 20/1 (16/18); 14/1 (8/10); 18/1 (12/13); 12/1 (10/18); 14/1 (6/11); 16/1 (13/13); 16/1 (4/17); 20/1 (5/9); 16/1 (7/7); 20/1 (9/9); 14/1 (8/10); 33/1 (5/14); 16/1 (9/16); 33/1 (12/16); 16/1 (1/9); 16/1 (9/9); 14/1 (8/10); 12/1 (9/11); 20/1 (5/14); 16/1 (3/14); 33/1 (3/11); 18/1 (4/13); 20/1 (3/7); 16/1 (8/11); 33/1 (8/18); 14/1 (15/18); 33/1 (5/15); 14/1 (5/7); 25/1 (3/8); 16/1 (10/13); 20/1 (4/21); 25/1 (13/13); 16/1 (4/15); 16/1 (8/10); 33/1 (8/8).

June: 16/1 (9/12); 33/1 (12/15); 20/1 (6/9); 25/1 (5/10); 16/1 (6/9); 33/1 (7/8); 20/1 (11/11); 20/1 (9/9); 16/1 (13/13); 25/1 (2/7); 16/1 (16/20); 20/1 (1/19); 18/1 (7/9); 33/1 (7/8); 25/1 (6/13), 25/1 (5/10); 25/1 (6/12); 25/1 (10/10); 50/1 (9/9); 16/1 (14/14); 20/1 (11/14); 33/1 (6/7); 16/1 (8/11); 16/1 (6/13); 14/1 (5/5); 16/1 (10/11); 14/1 (4/9); 14/1 (8/14); 16/1 (8/13); 12/1 (11/14); 28/1 (7/10); 16/1 (10/11); 16/1 (3/6); 16/1 (11/20); 20/1 (2/12); 33/1 (5/7); 20/1 (8/10); 25/1 (6/6); 16/1 (3/16); 14/1 (6/8); 14/1 (10/14); 16/1 (11/14); 16/1 (5/6); 16/1 (6/8); 14/1 (8/8); 20/1 (13/21); 25/1 (10/11); 16/1 (9/10); 16/1 (2/7); 14/1 (6/8); 14/1 (6/7);
16/1 (2/9); 16/1 (1/10).

July: 14/1 (6/15); 16/1 (6/8); 25/1 (6/14); 16/1 (4/6); 25/1 (2/16); 25/1 (8/11); 12/1 (12/14); 16/1 (4/10); 16/1 (6/9); 12/1 (5/5); 16/1 (12/13); 20/1 (2/9); 16/1 (13/17); 14/1 (4/17); 12/1 (5/6); 33/1 (7/9); 16/1 (10/10); 16/1 (6/6); 25/1 (2/10); 22/1 (9/15); 20/1 (6/14); 16/1 (10/10); 16/1 (12/14); 16/1 (10/17); 16/1 (8/20); 16/1 (14/18); 16/1 (12/13); 25/1 (8/11); 16/1 (3/13); 20/1 (5/11); 20/1 (8/11); 14/1 (6/10); 16/1 (4/10); 16/1 (6/14); 20/1 (11/14); 20/1 (6/16); 16/1 (12/18); 16/1 (13/19); 18/1 (8/16); 16/1 (3/7); 40/1 (10/11); 20/1 (5/10).

Aug: 16/1 (3/14); 14/1 (5/7); 33/1 (4/8); 16/1 (11/20); 20/1 (9/13); 16/1 (13/14); 22/1 (7/17); 16/1 (8/9); 25/1 (10/10); 16/1 (7/12); 18/1 (8/12); 20/1 (15/15); 16/1 (1/13)

Right. Brunch then movies (Hot Pursuit), back at teatime!


sondrio2

blinking heck, youve put some work in there ray, get a cider lad, you deserve one.


Steve Walmsley

Just applying some basic logic, I suspect its the changes of going that we experience in the early and late months.

Perhaps the absolute refinement would be to limit betting to G-S or worse?


finky1

+52 today 2 winners


sondrio2

blimey, looking good


Ray Thompson

I’ve noticed in NH races that certain horses win on their favoured going and a great many of my NH system winners are “mud monkeys” that ONLY win on Heavy, SH, or Soft, often to the disbelief of the tv pundits who can’t be arsed to read the form correctly and/or never consider anything more than the top 4 or 5 in the betting, so until I’ve completed my current chart – Class & Going vs Race Distance – of this year’s results, then I’m as in the dark as you are Steve. Hopefully, I’ll complete it tomorrow.

Came out of the cinema shortly after 4 this afternoon and while my mate went to get the drinks in, I nipped into Betfred next door to check the results so far, but I bunged a fiver apiece on Rayak and Glens Wobbly in the 4.30 while I made some results notes. Nice £130 return, thank you. 😀


Tigris

Busy busy busy Ray,

I have done some number crunching making some assumptions:

For period 29.03.2015 to 04.08.2015

Number of days = 118
Average bets per day = 34
Average winning odds = 22
Number of wins = 194

So here is the math bit:

Outlay – 118 × 34 = 4012 points
Return – 194 × 22 = 4268 points
P&L = 4268 – 4012 = 256 points

At £2 a point for an outlay of £8024 and a return of £8536 that would have produced a profit of £512

SR = 4.5% with number of losing bets of 3818

So according to my calculations you are now £512 richer Ray since 29 March. Would you agree?


Ray Thompson

Great work there, Tigris, and I’d say you’re right to that £2. I have slid up the scale a bit though, increasing after a losing run of 20 to £3, after 40 to £4, but to be honest, it’s a bit hit and miss at the moment until we get more filters worked out. Personally, although it makes for an interesting read, I wouldn’t be counting the days in my calculations, just number of consecutive wins and losses. However, keep up the good work, mate, you’re exactly part of the team we need to make money.

Right, back to my Class/Distance/Going comparison chart. I’m hoping for completion today, but I do have to pop into town for a hour or so, and it’s my weekly swimming therapy this evening. 16 lengths should do it, as the actress said to the bishop…


finky1

what happens if you only back in races where the fav is 5/1 or better
compared to 2/1 or less and thanks for all your hard work


finky1

43 bets today not counting evenings


Tigris

Big number finky1, i have gone for 6 today with two more possibles just sitting below bsp odds range of 15 to 43 at the moment. Will check prices before the off.

Like you have not looked at evening yet.

Will be interesting to compare results later. If there are a few big price winners today then you will most likey be on. With mine and narrowing the selections hope is to hit at least one.


Tigris

Thanks Ray, I ran the basic system to BSP 15 to 43 from the 29 March 2015 to 5 August and found the following frequency of losing runs:

Losing runs in days
25
6
15
3
87
23
21
43
25
8
20
19
15
8
20
37
44
16
2
8
30
33
4
3
28
21
6
6
17
24
92
50
60
8
29
11
22
20
44
14
43
43
2
10
48
33
17
5
2
19
7
1
87
21
32
29
53
33
5
17
18
10
72
7
9
40
10
8
51
3
25
9
10
12
19
26
11
8
34
10
13
3
2
12
39
21
37
8
40
18
19
35
38
40
33
17
6
45
98
15
45
21
23
8
10
7
13
10
40
22
50
17
28
2
11
2
6
11
8
58
7
18
36
30
8
16
6
19
28
22
2
7
8
19
22
83
7
57
47
30
27
9
39
18
28
32
13
29
46
31
21
3
25
9
3
10
17
10
11
13
29
30
8
3
40
17
37
8
5
26
30
22
36
10
21
6
10
9
11


Ray Thompson

I’ve done my chart for the 187 flat turf handicap winners by class/going/distance so far during the 2015 flat season. Rather than attempt a huge double-grid here, I’ll just tell you how it pans out beginning with Class, then going, and distance last.

C1 3 winners, C2 21, C3 20, C4 54, C5 43, C6 47

Heavy 6, Soft + SH 33, G+GS 75, GF 68, Firm 5

5f 31 winners, 6f 31, 7f 37, 8f(1 mile) 27, 9f 5, 10f 25, 11/12f 21, 14f+ 10

I think this initially shows room for more filters, and I’m hoping that this and Tigris’s losing runs research (and anything else you chaps may have noticed that we’ve missed) take us further along the road to massive success. For a start, if some nice person with access to one of the databases that do instant counting, could let us know the TOTAL number of Flat turf handicaps with runners in the price range we’re targetting, and if they could break that down into the five Classes, then that would be a huge weapon to add to our armoury. I think, for example, that there are probably so few Class 1 races that meet our requirements, that the three winners we’ve spotted are probably in profit!

Back tomorrow, have fun!


finky1

3 winners today +25 today


sondrio2

this is getting to be a regular occurance finky, nice one


finky1

86 to win 25 same as backing 1/3 shot
keep going till i lose


Steve Walmsley

Interesting finky, I only managed 2 winners today:

Roxy Lane @ 20.99 BSP
Lydiate Lady @ 22.18 BSP

I am showing a loss of 10pts on the day.

Love to know what the 3rd winner was.


Tigris

Getting interesting Ray, I have done it on BSP 15 t0 43, so more or less fits your range, from 29.03.2015 to 05.08.2015 (assuming my counting Pivot table is correctly set up) there were 1346 handicap races with runners in this price range. Which should be roughly in the same region as doing the ISP range, give or take a few.

Would be helpful if someone else could do the same to see if this is in the right ball park?

Is this what you asked?


Tigris

Good going, no wins for me today with 5 bets – profit now +£29


finky1

i take prices before i go to work in morning at 9
the two horses you said above qualify also in the
430 in wolverhamton idol deputy qualify but during the
day must have been gambled on won on betfair 13.65 as i take
betfair sp on all qualifiers and check when i come home
from work in evenings


Ray Thompson

There were only two winners yesterday. Wolverhampton is an A/W course, therefore not in our remit.

Today, I’m starting a total grid of Flat Turf Maidens, as I keep seeing massive winning prices, way above our H/C levels. No harm in taking a look to see if we can use them in any way, even if they’re only going to be early/late season winners. I’ll let you know what I find when I’m done.

Got my Friday Club this p.m. and I gotta take a stack of cut-up buddleia that I’ve dug up to the gardening waste centre first, so unlikely I’ll complete the Maidens task today! Talk soon, have fun!


Tigris

Correction I had 8 bets on 6 August @ £2 = total outlay = £16, so running total is actually: +£23, since 1 August.

No bets today from my slimmed down system, though it has identified a few, but outside Odds range, interestingly by system yesterday had Gentlemen and Sallabeh, in fact seems throw out a few low price winners, trouble is not in odds range and not profitable to bet on, as then too many bets and too many losers.

List for today is:

17:55,Hayd,Felix Fabulla 4.7
19:30,Hayd,Jebediah Shine 5.1
20:35,Hayd,Joshua Potman 8.8
20:35,Hayd,Lucie Rie 9.4

Outside odds range and one is bottom weight. So no bet on these today.


Tigris

Now +£21 as Lucie Rie hit 15.0 just before the off, so was a bet, hard this business of BSP odds, I see how you missed the 70.0 finky1.

so just one bet for me today in the end.


Tigris

Ray, I know you are looking at Flat Turf Maidens, tricky it looks, I just did a little analysis for 2015 for Maidens and looks very hairy stuff. At BSP prices between 15 and 200, I got 2131 bets with 63 wins, and 2068 losers, SR = 2.96 and P&L = 87 points.

So would seem profit is possible, but the downside was the losing runs, biggest was 145, quite a long run!

I attempted to do some filtering and found that, the odds range seems optimum, with Class 4 & 5 maximising profit, also Good to Soft was not profitable.

Also found that Fillies and Geldings had the worse SR and thus profit, so taking these out, made quite a difference.

With one or two more tweaks I got to a SR of 4.5%, so betting on Maidens is still going to be one of lots and lots of losers, I got it down to about 5 bets per day, system gave out 18:25,Hayd,Colour Me Happy today which came second but not quite good enough.

I got system profit for 2015 to 300 points with 25 wins out 521 bets, so pretty low SR.

It would seem to be the case with any system so far we have looked at that betting on outsiders involves long losing runs and few winners, but since they offer bigger prices, the chance of profit is favourable, with nerves of steel maybe just maybe it could work.

Last winner in system was Lorelina on 30 July at 40.8 BSP, 19 losing bets since then…

Will post the selections for tomorrow if there are any….


Tigris

Here are three possible bets in a Maiden race today – all in the same race:

14:00,Newm,Gypsy Eyes
14:00,Newm,Sepal
14:00,Newm,Gale Song

Only a bet if odds are between 12.0 and 200 BSP just before the off.

Gypsy Eyes is highlighted as Jockey/Trainer Combo.


Tigris

Here are my selections for the Flat Handicaps today:

13:50,Hayd,Mujazif
14:20,Hayd,The Character
14:20,Hayd,Amood
16:00,Hayd,Akavit
16:00,Hayd,Jumeirah Glory
16:00,Hayd,Cyril
16:00,Hayd,Felix De Vega
16:35,Hayd,Straits Of Malacca
17:05,Hayd,Red Forever
18:40,Ayr,Pomme De Terre
18:40,Ayr,Penelope Pitstop
18:40,Ayr,A Lovable Rogue
19:10,Ayr,Mystical King

only a bet if odds are between 15 and 43 just before the off.


Ray Thompson

I did the maidens yesterday from season start, one winner on 28th Mar, the rest in April. I recorded four separate types of maiden race: Auction, Fillies/Stallions/Geldings only, Funds and the biggie, Stakes.

From 45 bets, Auctions came up with two winners – 16/1 and 20/1, returning 38 (-7) at ISP and 25 + 32 at BSP (+12) so I think we’ll say no to that one for the moment.

Fillies etc, from 88 bets produced one winner at 16/1 (20 BSP). ‘Nuff said!

Funds better, with only three winners from 149 bets. 40/1, 18/1 and 20/1, which would’ve lost 68 points, butBetfair gave 110, 40 & 42 or 182.50 after the 5% commission, enough to show a profit of +33.50. However, I don’t think that’s worth the hassle.

Maiden Stakes is a different kettle of fish though, and bears further research which I’ll get started on today. 173 bets returned nine winners at 25/1, 22/1, 50/1, 20/1, 25/1, 33/1, 16/1, 20/1 and 25/1. SP returned 245 a profit of +72. Nice, but…

Betfair gave 31,32,100,32,50,60,26,32,42. Yum! A total of 405, profit +212. Now THAT’S what I call a nice profit for the first month of the season.

As I said in an earlier post, this could be something that only happens early in the season, before even the trainers find out how good or bad their charges are. If it’s anything like the NH, beginning and end of the season are when the big prices are to be had. However, I’ll continue to bring this right up to date and see how it all pans out. And probably worth a comparison with last year. Also, if the first month or so is similar to this year, then we should also look at later in 2014 to see how we might get prepped for this year’s last couple of months of the flat.

Tigris, some good work there, which I see is comparable to my mini (but in depth!) examination.

 

Back soon… 🙂


Tigris

Gypsy Eyes won, but out of odds range….

-24 points today – running at -£3 as of today


Tigris

Two from my Maiden Stake System today:

14:00,Leic,Frock Coat 26.0
14:00,Leic,Gold Faith 17.0

Must be between 12.0 and 100.0 on Betfair just before the off.


Ray Thompson

Doing good there, Tigris. Maiden Stakes (NO single sex, funds or auctions attached to those two words, just the name of the Maiden Stakes) in May this year performed as follows:

There were 80 races that complied with the 16/1+ only (including horses that may have been less in the early betting but drifted out to at least 16/1, and those which could have been backed at early 16/1+ but ran at reduced odds). There were 309 possible bets across those races, returning 9 wins of 25/1,20/1,20/1,20/1,50/1, 25/1,16/1,50/1,20/1 to produce an ISP LOSS of 54 points.

Betfair paid 40,40,32,32,80,50,23,200,32 however, a resounding 503 points after commission – a PROFIT of 194 after losers and commission.

24 placers up to 66/1 (one at 100/1 which didn’t count!).

The +212 from 9 wins in April almost parallels the May result with same number of wins.

I’m off to visit the June results this afternoon!


Ray Thompson

….and June is a washout 🙁

From 84 qualifying races, 302 bets returned at SP – 28/1,33/1,20/1,25/1 for a LOSS of 192 points.

Betfair gave a minimum 50,100,90,40 back which after commision left a negative of 35.8 points. Note that I said “minimum”. Had you the time to get on really early, or pitched in when the money was better, then you would easily have cut that exchanges deficit of 35.8 back to around the zero mark, say 5 or so either side of Plus/Minus, but really, not enough to make you throw your hat in the air while screaming “Yee-haw!!!”

And actually, that would appear pretty stupid even when you ARE winning 🙂

I’ll probably get us right up-to-date tomorrow, but I am off to my half price Mondays cinema at lunch time. The Fantastic Four should appeal to all us comics nerds.

Have fun!


Tigris

Would have to play on Betfair very carefully I feel Ray….

Today I have:

14:30,Ayr,Raise A Billion
14:30,Ayr,Charava
16:00,Ayr,Little Belter
16:00,Ayr,Red Forever

Currently only Little Belter is in odds range.

Only a bet if between 15.0 and 43 just before the off.

Bank at -£3 today.


Ray Thompson

We seem to be singing from different pages of the hymn book. I’ve done these, all within the price range, but I’m being much more careful now, back down to £2 bets…

2.30 Kano’s Ghirl 50/1 ISP, taken 100 on Betfair
Bannock Town 66/1, taken 200
Penny Pursuits 50/1, 100 or BSP at the off

4.00 Two withdrawals mean the prices have altered but…
Little Belter was 20/1, I’m 32 before the WD
Mystical King was 33/1, I’m on 32 after the withdrawal

4.30 Next Edition 25/1, taken 50 BSP

Off to movies this p.m., back at tea-time (ish)

Your first 30 days for just £1

Have fun everyone!


finky1

try ayr cut down bets best ratings +horses priced 10/1 or better to 33/1
2 win betfair sp 2.30 raise a billion charavo
300 dark crystal
3.30 jinky
4.00red forever lady cordie
4.30 urbin moon mistitroc
5.00 spirit of the sea angelsabove
10 bets =20


Tigris

I think because of the low SR I am trying to reduce the number of bets, though I do have yours in my list, I am using some filtering to get down to fewer bets.

So only bet on my list is Little Belter, so would have just one bet today, unless prices move for others.


finky1

+24 today


finky1

tomorrow carlisl
2.45the westwalfan
3.50miss ranger /polly jackson
4.20 destination aim /moroco
17.25danny oruairc
lingfield
2.00bennelong
2.30 threebagsue
3.35spellmaker
5.25ladylunchalot /toptempo
11mbet at 2 bsp

no winners today -22


finky1

5.00 almoqatel/ diamond sam /lady pinnicalle
15.35 wind for power/ even stephan/ thatcherite
5.10 scorpio del cardo/ charles de mille /best boy
9x 2= 18 bsb tomorrow


Ray Thompson

July, with 50 more bets than June, still seems poor now with best result on wins at Betfair but still returning only 307 points to 352 bets, that’s minus 45 points overall. Place bets only on these sprang 43 returns at a profit of 29.50 BSP after commission. So, Flat Turf Maiden Stakes are pretty much similar to the Flat Turf Handicaps in that they are both very successful in late March, through April and early June, but seem to be in grip of the bookies’ price setters by mid-June.

Having said that, we’ve just had a 40/1 winner at Gowran Park with a 20/1 2nd paying just under 200 for the winner! Wow, that might tickle the August results nicely, the only previous winner being a 33/1 (60 BSP) this month. It’s all profit, folks!

My next job is to look at the results for Aug 2014 to the end of last year’s season to figure out the winning route through the cards for the rest of THIS year.

Also, a huge task, but as I know from my Jumps System worth it’s weight in gold, and that’s best/worst courses so far in the current year.

Enjoy Yourself! (Not just me who keeps saying that, it’s also the name of that 40/1 shot this evening!) 😀


Tigris

Tricky stuff Ray, still plugging away at my slimmed down systems I have one running on the Irish flat, but did not select the 40/1, still just had the winer of the 20:00 at GowP, got 19.0 on Betfair – Johann Bach, so very pleased with that. so was at -£3 to £2 point stakes, afar 5 bets since now at +£23

I’m still of the mind that this has to be a very tight system with few selections, I am running at about 3 or four a day, and some days none. So will persevere and see how I progress, I now have systems for UK Flat, UK Chase and UK Hurdle, IRE Flat and IRE Hurdle. I could not get the IRE Chase to work.


Tigris

Have three bets today, first one just won 🙂

Outlaw Kate 1730 FfosL @ 20.0 which brings it to +£50

other bets tonight are:

19.00 FfosL Bapak Bangsawan
20.00 FfosL Agreement

Have missed few due to slimmed down system but have reduced the number of losers, so far.

Good going tonight, Agreement just won @ 20.0 BPS, so 2/3 tonight.

Running total now +£88 @ £2 per bet.


Ray Thompson

I’ve done a chart of August to end of season (Nov 8th) 2014 from which the tracks with most wins (Handicaps 16/1-33/1 excluding top two and bottom weight/card numbers and Maiden Stakes 16/1 to 66/1) appear to be instantly discernible, but we have to subtract number of actual bets from the totals and that’s going to take me some time to count and record. Newmarket threw up 20 winners in the period Aug 1st to Nov 8th last year, but until we know how many bets in each race, including the losing races of course, we can’t say what the profit/loss is.

I’ve started on this task early this morning and am still in August! I’ll be back when it’s all done…


Tigris

Will be interesting to read your results, it will no doubt be the number of bets that determine if this is profitable angle.

I”ve been using my tools to look at the Maidens too, and have found these are quite tricky as little or no form to go on and simply backing all the big prices in every race does not look like a good strategy. With lots of tinkering I have come up with two systems that produce around 3 selections per day between them with SR’s of 10% & 13% respectively.

I have three selection tonight in the 17:30 at Newmarket:

Only bet if between 12.0 and 200 for:
Easy Code
Divertido

Only bet if between 12.0 and 100 for:
Al Hamd

To Betfair prices just before the off.


Ray Thompson

Still stuck in May 2014 to count every bet, but the best wins per track in Aug to 8th Nov of last season looks like this –

Nmk 20, York 12, Ayr 9, Cur 9, Not 9, Bri 8, Don 7, Hay 7, Ham 6, Red 6, San 6, Chs 5, Goo 5, Rip 5, Asc 4, Crl 4, then a few 3-2-1-0s.

Four of those have runners today and winners at this meeting last year (Saturday Aug 16th 2014). If you’d bet on every contender based on my figures: Handicaps 16/1 – 33/1 after discounting the top two and the bottom of the card, and Maiden Stakes (often just referred to as “Maidens” at Irish tracks) and INCLUDING EBF or ebf stakes (European Breeders Fund – contrary to my first impression!) at 16/1 – 66/1 without discounting any card numbers/weights, then this is what we see…

Chs 5 bets on 7 races – some no contenders, returned 1 win at 16/1, 25 BSP
Don 29 bets, 7 races, returned 16/1, 22 BSP
Nmk 7 bets, 7 races – some no contenders – ret 20/1 twice, 25 and 32 BSP
Rip 26 bets, 6 races, ret 20/1, 32 BSP

For 67 bets there was a return of 97 (+30) at ISP, 130 BSP after comm. (+63)

Now That’s what I call Music!

Back to the slog … although I’m seriously thinking of abandoning it and just comparing each day’s meeting with last year’s equivalent.

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson

Saturday was seriously bad for me, even with the early Betfair prices. Four winners: Czabo was 33/1 yesterday morning and 60 on Betfair; Polar Forest 25/1, 32; Kastini 16/1, 24 and Syncopate also 16/1 and 25 BSP. And I’m £64 down 🙁

Pontefract today, but I’m leaving it alone as last year from August 1st to end of season it only produced three winners.

So we do not have a feasible system yet. Arrrgh!

#

Tigris

I did not have any of the winners yesterday, but only had 5 bets and with 3 from previous day losing that means I am +£72 @ £2 per bet. So have so far restricted the number of bets and the number of losers.

Today I have a few on the jumps, with the systems I developed based on your insightful writings Ray, here are mine for today:

UK_CHASE – only bet if ODDS between 17 & 34 BPS just before the off
15:00 Sthl Moorlands Jack
15:00 Sthl Owen Glendower
15:00 Sthl Montoyas Son

All three for Chase are currently out of odds range for a bet.

HRDL_HND_UK_ Only bet if ODDS between 15 & 40 just before the off
15:30 Sthl Jigsaw Financial
15:30 Sthl Mac Bertie
16:05 Sthl Factor Fifty
17:05 Sthl Monzino
17:05 Sthl Amber Flush
17:35 Sthl Exit To Freedom
17:35 Sthl Lawsons Thorns

17:35 Sthl Solway Trigger

For the Hurdles, only few at the moment are in odds range, but I included them so you can see if the prices change. Currently only three are in odds range (those in bold)


Ray Thompson

Sgt Bull Berry did the biz yesterday at 20/1, so I’m pleased to have taken the early doors 48 at Betfair. Nothing looks of interest today on the investment front, but I’m really looking forward to Wednesday and York, as I’m sure we’ll have a few big priced winners. First day last year saw winners Blaine at 12/1 (opened at 16/1 – PEAKED at 60 on Bf); Dutch Connection 16/1 (32) and Edge Of Sanity 25/1 (opened 33/1 – 55 Bf)

Keep your powder dry until then.

Have fun!


Tigris

Thought you'd have that one Ray, when it won, I thought that is Ray’s!

Had three yesterday but no winners, so running total stands at +£66

possibles for me today are:

1610 Thirsk Trinity Star
1640 Thirsk Brilliant Boy

Currently these are out of odds range of 15 to 43 just before the off.

Plus trying a system on the Irish Flat:

17:45,Rosc(IE),Bishan Bed
18:15,Rosc(IE),Corker Hill
18:15,Rosc(IE),Catchy Lass
18:45,Rosc(IE),A Twist Of Fate
18:45,Rosc(IE),Focas Mor

18:45,Rosc(IE),Grandma Dotty,
18:45,Rosc(IE),Sea Bank
18:45,Rosc(IE),Perfect Ten,
18:45,Rosc(IE),Mountain Kingdom,
18:45,Rosc(IE),Sacred Dragon,

18:45,Rosc(IE),Mozetta,

Currently only ones in Bold are in odds range of 16 to 33, so only five are potential bets just before the off.

Will be watching your system this coming week Ray as there will be a lot bets I suspect.


Ray Thompson

I had 24 short listed over the three handicaps at York today. I noticed the previous three years were all on good to firm going but now we’re good to soft. I removed the hard ground (F&GF) winners and close-up finishers and kept the GS and mud-monkeys. That leaves 14 selections over the three races. I’m going with them.

I’m leaving Carlisle and Ffos Las alone – Crl only had 4 winners with our requirements from August to end of season last year, Ffo only 3.

The big fields at York mean 4 places to anyone doing e/w or place only, but more selections if you’re win only like me.

Enjoy yourselves and don’t get too drunk when you win 🙂


Ray Thompson

Last year at York on day 2 Queen Of Ice won the 4.20 at 20/1, the year before the 3.05 produced Mont Ros at 25/1 (50 BSP). In 2011 the going, as today, was Good to Soft and Navajo Chief slid in at 25/1. Slow but steady profits are definitely possible – or should I say probable – at this excellent annual meeting.

Caspian Prince won at 20/1, early BSP was 40+, I got 36 and with my other 13 selections losing that was enough for a decent day’s work. Glad to see it was one of Matt’s selections too!

Only two handicaps today, I’ve got five possibles at each, including one shared by Matt’s selections today. MyBetfair asks are in brackets with the BSP option at the off (a bit like BOG, except you choose the top price)

3.05 Penitent 25/1 (50)
One Word More 33/1 (70)
Russian Realm 16/1 (25)
Extremity 16/1 (25)
Melvin The Great 22/1 (34)

4.55 Azagal 33/1 (70)
Alexandrakollontai 33/1 (70) (collar and tie, geddit?! – simples!)
Risen Sun 20/1 (32)
Margaret’s Mission 18/1 (28)
Subtle Knife 18/1 (28)

All winners/close-ups on GS-S except one never raced on GS or softer but won on Good, so unproven on this surface.

Enjoy!


Tigris

Well done Ray, I preferred to observe yesterday and today have a few at York i thought i would go with:

1505
Balducci
Fort Bastion
Penitent

And one at Stratford in the 1715
Aughcarra. See if the NH strategy is worth a go.

Will give Hamilton a look later as you say looks interesting.


Ray Thompson

No good yesterday but today’s races at both York and Sandown are of interest.

Mistiroc in York’s first (1.55) won on this Friday last year … a maiden at Hamilton! Others I’m on include Emerahldz, Pearl Castle and Buonarroti.

Today here last year the 4.20 Maiden was won by White Lake 25/1 and the 4.55 handicap by Master The World 16/1 (opened at 20s)

My short lists at Sandown are in 3.30 and 4.05 maidens and teensie bets on the outsider in each of the handicaps at 5.15 and 5.50

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Thankfully, My Dream Boat sailed in yesterday at 33/1, 60 BSP (touched 80s) and rescued me with plenty in the account now to finance today’s 50 selections at Chester, Curragh, Sandown and good ol’ York.

Today one year ago (Sat 23rd Aug) there were meetings at The Curragh and – obviously – the last day at York. Winners at Curragh included a 20/1 in the 2.35 maiden and 12/1 (16/1 all day before the off) in the 4.50 H/C. At York there were 2 winning H/Cs – 2.40 and 3.50 at 16/1 (opened 20/1) and 20/1.

I’m confident that THIS Saturday will be better than the last one!

Have fun! 🙂

P.S. Good filters: Wins at Curragh last year were ALL 16/1 or 20/1 except an early August 50/1 and a late season 25/1.
At York, the 8 August wins were all 16/1, 20/1 and 25/1. Late season were 20/1 and 3x 25/1.
ALL returned MUCH higher prices at BSP.

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson

Another small profit yesterday. Today, in line with the filter mentioned yesterday, at Curragh I’m backing 16/1 and 20/1 runners ONLY in the four handicaps and the Maiden. There are six possibles at the moment, but the filter is based on ISP.

Because the early prices aren’t always the same at the off as they were earlier, and to tie in with last year’s results, I’ll be pushing the Betfair win buttons that correspond with the bookies prices of 16/1 and 20/1 to make that bit more profit.

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Small profit again yesterday. This evening’s two right-handers, Crl & Lei, have potential I think. Carlisle’s 4 wins last year in August were 16/1, 18/1, 20/1 and 22/1. Leicester only had three wins late last year but – oh boy! – they were biggies at 50/1 (95), 33/1 (60) and 33/1 (65).

By excluding the lefties and the really obvious no-hopers (gulp!), I’ve whittled the four bigger fields down to 3 max choices each, leaving 3 races with 2 selections and two with one pick each, a total of 12 bets.

I’ll put them up here later after I see how the weather/going is by tea time-ish but well before the off.

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson

Crl 5.05 Petergate 25/1 40
Dalby Spoof 20/1 32
Highfield Lass 40/1 65

Crl 5.40 Jazzy 25/1 34
Seaperle 33/1 50
Silent Diva 16/1 24

Crl 6.10 Glen Lea 25/1 40
Macarthur’s Park 50/1 100

Crl 7.10 Under Approval 22/1 34
Pickle Lilly Pearl 18/1 29

Lei 5.25 Frank Cool 25/1 40
Demand Respect 40/1 65
Pastoral Star

Lei 5.55 Azizu 25/1 40
Tulip Dress 16/1 30

Lei 6.25 Captain Swift 16/1 25

Lei 6.55 Mininggold 16/1 24
David’s Beauty 25/1 48

Lei 7.55 Anastazia 18/1 28
Celtic Sixpence 20/1 32

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Dalby Spoof saved us with a reasonable profit!

Looking for a good swimmer today 🙂

A Maiden might be worth a small touch – just for a laugh, you understand – and A Definite Diamond at 100/1 currently (2.30 Chp) has my £2 at 220 on Betfair.

It definitely didn’t like the Good to Firm on it’s only turf outing.

Nothing else to say really, just hope they don’t abandon.


Ray Thompson

Much nicer day for racing with Catterick and Musselburgh this afternoon.

While Mus is better for H/Cs(H) than Maidens(M), Cat is equally good at either.

Mus 2.00M Duncan Of Scotland 20/1
Cat 2.10M Spike 20/1
Mo Wonder 33/1
Mus 2.30H Docali 20/1
Cat 2.40M Angrove Fatrascal 22/1
Anieres Boy 20/1
Bionic Indian 25/1
Mus 3.00H Searchlight 20/1
Cat 3.10H War Poet 25/1
My Destination 33/1
Mus 3.30H That Be Grand 20/1
Cat 4.10H Amis Reunis 16/1
Betty Boo 22/1
Mus 4.30H Geanie Mac 20/1
Mus 5.15H Galvanize 33/1
Perfect Peak 16/1

Only need ONE to show a profit on the day, and all that fun. Evening races next after I’ve had a little study. I’ve also got the 2014/2015 results and a comparison piece that should hopefully spark some more filters/winners. A look at 50/1+ winners – are they worth betting on? We’ll see.

Later! 🙂


Ray Thompson

During 2014’s turf flat racing season, 39 MAIDEN Stakes wins at 50+ were recorded on Betfair, for a return of 5,010 points. In the same season, 33 Handicap wins at 50+ BSP returned 2,467 points.

101 other Maidens won in the 16/1 to 40/1 range
237 other Handicaps won in the 16/1 to 40/1 range

What we need to know now of course is how many BETS were actually placed in those four categories and how much was returned from the lower two.

You’ll be pleased to hear I’m on it, but it’s quite time consuming and you’ll have to take them as I complete them from each month throughout 2014 so that we can do a detailed comparison with THIS year. I’ve already discovered that in April 2014 53 points could have been saved by NOT betting in any Maiden with an odds-on favourite.

More soon – tomorrow I expect.


Ray Thompson

G’day, and two Aprils to compare – actually starting from 29th March 2014 and 28th this year.

Last year’s Maidens in April (didn’t Josef Locke sing a song called that? 🙂 ):
543 bookie bets (none in races with an odds-on favourite) returned 306 points (-237) SP to 6 winners, but 773 bets on 9 races including those with odds-on faves at Betfair gave back a superb 430 points profit (408 after 5% commission).

This year’s April Maidens returned 13 winners at 343 SP from 118 bets (+225pts) with Betfair giving out 655 (+622.28 after comm)

This shows the importance of getting the best return on your investment. If you aren’t using Betfair, then make sure you use bookies offering B.O.G. In 2014 there were 194 more bets with odds-on favourites. Of those, only three gave system winners. They were at 100/1, 25/1 and 16/1, giving a huge loss on the 194 at SP. Betfair, however, paid 620, 48 and 24 for those three. Go figure.

Flat turf handicaps in the same period gave 460 bets from which, having struck off the bottom weight and the TWO top weights (top two and bottom one on the race cards), brought home exactly 500 on SP (plus 40pts) and 782 at Betfair, or 742.90 after comm, a profit of +282.90.

Before I start on each of the other months in the season, I thought we should look first at last September’s results in both those areas of possible profit in order to sharpen our tactics for the coming month.

More profit yesterday and hopefully as least as much today!

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson

17 bets today, 4.55Y Haalan w.22/1, 38BSP (36.10 post comm) = 19.90 points profit today.

 

Genesis of a Betting System (Part 2)

In this second part of a serialization of one of the more interesting Geegeez Gold forum threads, we follow the intrepid forumites as they look to better shape their still somewhat amorphous betting system idea. A couple of sub-systems hive off and are live tracked.

If you missed part 1, you can - and should - read that here.

So, to part 2...


Ray Thompson

Evening all! Well, I had 22 bets this afternoon at. No luck at Bev (8 bets, £16), but Goodwood came good with a bookie SP profit of £35 and Betfair (where my money always goes) giving back 75 which, after 5% comm excl stake, was a nice profit on the day of £49.55

I have 17 bets on three races at Galway this evening, 4 dead already in the 6.50, will check out the rest later when I return from a nice pub quiz…

Ray.


Ray Thompson

Last night’s 17 failed to win, leaving profit on the day £32.55.

Here are the results of THIS year’s first 100 of the season, starting with smallest field.

Flat Turf Handicaps 2015

3. 4/1*
5. 5/4 13/8 9/2
6. 6/4 7/4 11/4 3/1 5/1 10/1 28/1*
7. 6/5 2/1 9/4 7/2 4/1 11/2 8/1 9/1 16/1
8. 2/1 5/2 11/4 5/1 9/1 20/1
9. 9/4 3/1 3/1 7/2 4/1 4/1 6/1 11/2 15/2 16/1*
10. 5/1 6/1 6/1 7/1 10/1 28/1*
11. 5/2 3/1 7/2 4/1 6/1 7/1 9/1 11/1 11/1 16/1 20/1
12. 7/4 5/2 3/1 3/1 3/1 7/2 9/2 15/2 9/1 9/1 12/1 14/1 14/1 14/1
13. 9/2 5/1 11/2 7/1 8/1
14. 4/1 5/1 11/2 13/2 25/1 25/1
15. 9/2 11/2 11/2 10/1 14/1
16. 8/1 14/1 20/1
17. 7/1 10/1 12/1 16/1
18. 7/2 17/2 14/1 18/1
19. 8/1
20. 14/1
21. 14/1
22. 12/1
23. 8/1

*Rank outsider

By price range

Up to 2/1 – 10
9/4 to 4/1 – 24
9/2 to 15/2 – 27
8/1 to 10/1 – 15
11/1 to 14/1 – 13
16/1 to 20/1 – 7
22/1 to 28/1 – 4

Looks like about three less outsiders than last year, but some of the 11-14/1s were 16/1+ in the betting forecast. I’d say back them if the 16/1+ is available.

My jumps system fancies Letter Of Credit at Gal 5.30

Catch ya later!

Ray


Ray Thompson

Expect you were all on Sands Of Time and Pastoral Player in the first and last at Goodwood yesterday? Can we win there three days in a row? Plenty to back there today, beginning with five in the first.

My jumps selections today are:
Str 2.45 Tribal Dance 16/1 25 5
Gal 4.45 Thousand Stars 25/1 50 7

Back this p.m. with an interesting observation which is probably another good filter for the flat turf handicap outsiders.

Have fun!


Ray Thompson

Instead of just number of runners, I wondered about position on racecard of outsider winners in the 14/1 to 33/1 range. First thing I spotted was a shortage of bottom weight winners. So far, as well as the first 100 turf flat handicap races 2015 (above) I’ve compiled the results for the the remainder of April (11 winners from 18th – 30th) and am about halfway through May with seven winners so far. The majority (full detailed chart to come when I’m up to date) are somewhere in the middle. Currently I’d suggest not backing top two and bottom weights. Any contender in any of those three positions should be discounted – less bets more profit, right?

Enjoy!


Ray Thompson
Jumps this afternoon are:

Ban 2.10 Nafaath 14/1 22
Ban 4.30 Heist 14/1 22
Gal 5.10 Shield 25/1 40+
Gal 6.15 Protaras 20/1 32


Ray Thompson

Well, jumps no good again yesterday, the out-of-season summer always shows a dip in bets and profits, which is why I’m so pleased with this new flat turf handicap system. I made well over £200 yesterday and maybe (by accident) just under £900 today, because I (a) bet fivers, forgetting that I’ve been doing £2 until now, probably because I’d keyed my jumps bet in first and more serendipitous – that means “happy accident” – I twice backed Altharoos at 34 on Betfair – that’s a “d’oh!” for the senior moment and a “yes!” when I saw the result!

I think I’ve spotted another little helper, but it will mean more bets: maiden stakes tend to chuck up massive priced winners too. But before committing to that I’ll need to go back over the cards and results of this year’s flat just to be sure that profit greatly outweighs input.

I’m up to June’s results now, so in a few more days I’ll hopefully be right up to date with our system. Sorry, did I say “our”? 🙂  I haven’t seen much response to my request for everyone else to throw in their expertise. But hey, I know it seems longer, but I’ve only been ensconced for ten days!

More tomorrow, remember to have fun!

PS, just noticed that Frightened Rabbit popped in at Ham – 14/1, 22Bf followed 15 mins later by … wait for it! … Cherry Kool at Lin 33/1, 65 at Bf!
Wow, I seem to be getting rich suddenly!


Everyone calls me Paul

Well done Ray (even if Frightened Rabbit beat SotD!)


finky1

ray i like your way of thinking
would you back all 16/1 to 33/1 in one race
some races could have up to 10 bets
and at 5 a bet that could be expensive
if you got a bad run
what about the border horses 14/1 would you
put a bet on them


Clayton Risk

Hi Ray, firstly thanks for sharing

One question I want to ask is that when I am paper trading past couple of days, you may have more than two top weight and bottom weight

So what do you do in that situation, go with whoever is the 1st/last two at either end?


Ray Thompson

finky – in cases where the betting forecast has 16/1 or more but the early actual bookie showings say 14/1 then yes, as you’ll notice in the earlier posts here, I have suggested they should be included. I also strongly suggest exchange betting or at a pinch bookies offering best odds guaranteed, a prime example being Dark Crystal a couple of days ago. It was 33/1, but drifted to 40, and on Betfair I always go for more, in this case betting 65 or BSP at the off (that option is always there). Try paper bets or a quid per selection at a b.o.g. until you gain the confidence (and the bank) to increase. Remember, flat turf handicaps only, and I’ll be mentioning another filter shortly.

Cheers buddy, hope that helps!

Clayton, looking at the 100 results of last year and this year, as shown in earlier posts, it’s clearly not worth betting on the top two or the bottom weight, so that becomes a major money-saving filter. The middle field weights are much better and as I’ve just noted above, I may have another filter which precludes any of the lower runners on the card, which gives enormous savings on huge fields. I’ll have this sussed in a day or two, but it is looking really promising.

Have fun!


finky1

23 horses backed in all handicaps today see what happens
14/1 to 33/1 on betfair small stakes


sondrio2

good stuff ray, best of luck with this and thanks for all your input, very much appreciated.


Ray Thompson

Cheers, Sondrio!

finky – me too!! Hope you asked for double or BSP and I hope they’re the same 23 as mine 🙂


Tigris

Clay, I’ve been following along and applying the ‘Ray’ Method, I had about 6 bets last night one of which was Frightened Rabbit. I have 8 today, a couple are just short on the odds but have include them. I am attempting to reduce the number of bets, as for me 23 is quite a lot. I am using odds range of 16/1 to 33/1 with a little margin either side.


Clayton Risk

Hi Tigris, how I have done todays is Racing Post and Turf Flat Handicaps and then any that are 16/1 – 33/1 in the betting forecast at bottom of the field then seeing any of those are either top 2 weights or bottom one weight, if not these weights then is a bet

Or is there the “proper” way to do it as I am a little slow on the uptake on these things, so sorry in advance as a newbie to geegeez 🙂


sunchu

I have been following this thread closely and what I’ve done is shortlisted the contenders down in the races using speed ratings the ones I have backed today are
AVON SCENT 2.30 CHEP
BOUNTYBEAMADAM 3.40 CHEP
CHOSEN CHARACTER 3.50 CHESTER
CHESTER DEYLETE 4.45 CHEP
BERTIE MOON 4.55 CHESTER
NAKETTA 5.25 CHESTER in a ew hienz its an interesting method ray I would like to see if there was a class filter ie back in races class 456 or 234 I cant find this out as have not got the software to run it just a thought sunchu


Tigris

I followed Ray like you Clay:

“All outsider winners came in at 16/1 plus, but NONE at greater than 33/1 ISP (65 BSP), so, taking all our selections from ISP, what happens when we install limits of 16/1 to 33/1 and exclude the TWO TOP WEIGHTS (see results by weight posted above on the 25th). We have…”

I also exclude Class 1, but not many of those and none today.

I am using BSP 17.0 to 43.0 Odds to narrow down the selections and reduced the numbers. I am still not sure about FCSP, so of the next race at Galway I have:

15:20 Gal(IE) Fastidious 36.0
15:20 Gal(IE) Kapstadt 36.0

They meet Ray’s parameters (my interpretation of them at least).

My first three of the day were not places, but I estimate a SR of <10% based on my calculations of back testing, so not expecting many winners, I suspect that with Ray’s 23 today, he is running at a much lower SR, maybe 5%

Yesterday I had one winner and three were placed out of the 6 or so I bet on, so encouraging that the Ray System may show a profit, well a hope at least.


sondrio2

tigris, are these bets win only or win and place


Tigris

Sondrio2, Win only singles for 2% of bank but, I also putting small ew multiple like heinz or L15/L31 for pennies, and yesterday had 4 wining selections in the multiple, 3 placed and one winner, so only got place odds for acc part of bet, but still quite respectable. Doesn’t look like I will have that today, last two run in 1700 at Galway, so relying on a winner today….


sondrio2

thanks tigris, good luck mate

Your first 30 days for just £1

finky1

betfair account =+80 after todays 23 bets at 2 a bet
system worked today but had to wait for secound last
race for first winner and last race for next winner
which was the profit for day


Clayton Risk

Nice profit there finky 🙂

I had nowt for today with my 12

Would just like to ask if Ray if this system is at looking at betting forecast that can be done night before or in the morning of the days racing or are we to be going by betfair prices at the off

clay


sunchu

just an observation if I am right in thinking that berrahri and mysterial were the only winners in this system today they were both in the top 3 on geegeez speed ratings and others selections in the system who lost were outside the top 3 apart from chosen character in the 3.50chester who was in the top 3 i’m going to keep checking results in the coming week to see if this repeats sunchu


finky1

prices were 22/1 +44/1=66/1×2=132
23 bets cost = -46
= 86
commission 5 = -4
+82 today


Tigris

Thanks finky1, most helpful, I have been considering the differences introduced by FCSP, ISP & BSP. My take is that betting to ISP/FCSP would show a consistent loss over time, which is what Ray described in his earlier post. I did a ‘snap-shot’ test for a 7 day period based on a system with the following parameters: UK Handicaps; Not top 1 or 2 in weights or bottom weight; Not Class 1; Odds range 17.0 to 34.0 FCSP:

This meant I excluded the two winners from yesterday finky1 as their FCSP were below 17.0. Betting to ISP of between 15.0 and 34.0 What I go was:

Number of bets = 175
Staked @ £2 per bet = £350
Win Return based on 5 wins @ 34.0, 34.0, 21.0, 19.0, 21.0 = £248
P&L = -£102

I would accept that placing the bets on Betfair would have given higher odds, and the £102 loss, would likely have shown a modest profit depending on the BSP odds obtained.

My take is only way to have chance of profit, whether you make your original selections beaded on FCSP or ISP is to then bet to BSP to maximise the odds obtained. So as long as your original selections were made with odds ranges 15.0 to 34.0, and even if BSP is above 34.0 then this still a bet. in this way BSP does not determine whether to place a bet or not, BSP is only about maximising the odds obtained.

So to sumarise:

Make selection based on FCSP or ISP of odds between 15.0 and 34.0
Bet to BSP to get better odds

However there is word of caution, expect a lot of loosing bets, from my small one week snap-shop it showed a S/R of 3%

I then ran a system based solely on BSP with odds range 15.0 to 43.0 with Rays parameters and then added some more in order to reduce the number of bets and improve the S/R. I did 2015 and got the following stats:

Number of Selections = 307
Number of winners = 28
Number of looser = 279
P/L @ 1 point per bet = 271
S/R = 9%

For 2015 @ £2 level stake:

Outlay = £614
Loss = £558
Return = £1100
P/L = £542

However with Ray's original parameters the system showed a small profit, but not one to get excited about.

The bets have to placed near the off with this BSP system, as odds have to be in range 15.0 to 43.0, and they fluctuate over the day.

The longest loosing run so far was 51 bets with this system. with about 5 bets per day, the last winner in this system was on 01.08.2015 (Frightened Rabbit @ 22.0) and then 18.07.2015 (Etienne Gerard @ 18.5 BSP), and the one before was on 17.07.2015 (Poyle Vinnie @ 29.0), no wins yesterday from the 6 selections.

Ray your system no doubt will find winners, but does it produce a constant profit over time? Having a 33/1 winner is nice, but having 60 or 70 loosing bets is not so nice. The system I produced does have to exclude some winners in order to reduce the number of losers, of course there is no guarantee that the past equals the future so this system may not continue to show a profit.

I’ll run the system later today and put up the selections here so you can compare them to yours.


Tigris

Here is the 1543System output, I have also included the ones that are out of the odds range at the moment, so these would be a no bet, but nearer the off these odds may change so have included them, I have removed any selections with odds way out of the range and unlikely to get in to range near the off, so left with:

14:45,Ripon,Macarthurs Park 29.0
15:30,Nott,Pull The Plug 13.0
17:00,Nott,Oakley Star 11.0
17:00,Nott,Malice 50.0
17:00,Nott,Leave It To Arno 55.0
17:15,Ripon,Cavalieri 19.50
17:45,Carl,Plunder 35.0
18:45,Carl,Iggy 15.50
18:45,Carl,Tinsill 18.50
20:15,Carl,Ronaldinho 23.0
20:45,Carl,New Colours 12.0

The odds range is BSP 15 to 43, so only a bet if near the off the odds are in this range, so at current odds onBetfair only those in bold are selection to place a bet only 6 bets at the moment, near the off this could change, so some may get ruled out and others ruled in. So with this system you have to wait 5 minutes or less before the off, as it it relies on BSP to predict winners.

Interesting to see how these compare to your selection for today.


finky1

15 bets today not counting evening meeting or naas


finky1

=20 today no time to put bets on tonight


Tigris

Slimmed down system had no winners yesterday. Ray’s had at least two. Today just three dropped out of slimmed down system:

1615 Cat Rockby
1745 Cat Atreus
1935 Rip Lad Web

For comparison to Ray’s original system.


finky1

30 bets today not counting tonights meetings


Tigris

For a system based on UK Flat Handicaps excluding the top two weights – According to my records there were two winners yesterday, Sergeant Pink 29.93 & Call it on 29.44 with 41 bets (note I cannot exclude the bottom weight fr0m my system calculator, so may be some bottom weights in there) so last night I estimate:

41 bets @ £2 = £82
Return = £120
P&L = £36

I have just run some number for 2015, and the following is what I got for UK Flat Handicaps excluding the top two weights:

total bets = 3978
Wins = 175
Losers = 3803
P&L = -200 Points (assuming 1 point per bet)

This is to BSP using odds range of 15.0 to 43.0, if you take out the bottom weights that may help or hinder the bottom line, I could not remove them from my calculator.

2014 showed a slight loss of -38 points.

So my calculations suggest it is not overall profitable even at BSP, even if you took out the bottom weights I suspect it would not go into profit, as some of these may actually have been winners anyway.

The estimate is about 30 bets per day and a SR of 4%, so expect a lot of losers. To put on 30 bets a day is quite a task, every day!

I did a bit more digging and found that ages 3,4 & 5 showed the most potential profit, for 2015 the stats are for odds 15 to 43 BSP, excluding the top two weights:

Age/Runs/Wins/Loser/SR/PL
3/160/13/147/8.12/95
4/103/9/94/8.74/105
5/55/7/48/12.73/74

This doubles the SR and puts the system into profit of a total of 274 points for 2015 to date, 2014 showed a similar pattern.

I feel there is a lot more refining that can be done to create a profitable system, so my conclusion at this stage Ray is that your system is not profitable over the long term, with some further refining I think it could be worth teasing out, so for me I would not be backing 30 horses a day in such an ‘unrefined’ system given the stats I have come up with. Assuming of course Ray I have applied your method to my analysis….

Really enjoying the analysis and thank you for setting this thread off…..

Would welcome your comments Ray, and of course challenges to my analysis most welcome.


Steve Walmsley

Just a couple of thoughts for system refinement – perhaps you could run them through your database Tigris.

1) Exclude Nursery Handicaps
2) Exclude 3YO only Handicaps
3) Exclude Races of more than 16 runners.


finky1

+ 20 yesterday didnt back any in evening meeting
30 bets today +12 didnt back evening meeting also


sondrio2

thats good going finky, nice profit mate


Tigris

Thanks Steve will try these. One thing to add is the stats i prouduced for 2014 showing a profit for 3,4 & 5 year olds i used a lot more filters to get into profit.

When i simply excluded top 2 weights and did 3 to 5 year olds system still showed a loss of 300 points. So i had to filter a lot lot more. So simply following Ray’s method for 3 to 5 year olds still (with my stats) showed a loss for 2014.

For example i excluded certain courses such as Windsor – as Ray pointed to the track issue in an earlier post.


Tigris

Good going finky1, i’ve just looked back at my slimmed down 1543System and since Frightened Rabbit win @ 15.5 have had 13 loosing bets to yesterday. So is in profit by +5 points. That is 1 win out of last 13 = 7.69% sr

Prior to last win had loosing run of 56 however, putting that into perspective just before this loosing run there were 4 winners in 10 bets @ 18.5 20.0 19.0 & 18.0 = 151 points (@ £2 per point). So outlay is 112 giving a profit of +£39, so adding the 5 gives +£41 since 8 July.

So system is due a win based on sr however, loosing runs would seem inevitable with this system.

Today i have:

1600 Brig Liberty Rule
1650 Brig Delydream
1700 Chep Mistamel


finky1

30 bets today not counting evening
just wondering would this improve
as season closes i notice alot of outsiders win near end of season


Ray Thompson

Hi, guys! Been a bit under the weather with hay fever last few days, but while I’ve not been posting or betting, Ihave been researching. Once I had all the results to date, I did a comparison with last year’s figures and it’s pretty clear that the start of the season in both years yields greater outsider wins than the middle. Since my huge win five days ago when I tempted fate by saying “Wow, I think I’m getting rich!”, I’ve had mediocre to appalling results, so I don’t think it’s the fault of fate, in which I don’t believe anyway, but rather the fault of the system. As it stands, the outsider system may well be at its best at either end of the season. More research will tell.

I have all the winner results for the current year with racecard position (weight) and number of runners. It’s all on paper at the mo’ but I’ll document it here for you today. It appears at first glance to be strongly indicating that field size doesn’t matter, but a few paper tests will be more accurate. Back soon.

****

In Part 3 of the series, Ray's back, and he's unearthed some more important elements in the quest to refine his strategy...

Genesis of a Betting System (Part 1)

Back in the good old days, before Geegeez Gold came into our world, this website was a home to betting system reviews and betting systems. Such approaches are considered terribly out of fashion at the moment, usurped by ten-a-penny tipsters and the occasional genuine advisory service.

This article is the first in a serialization of a thread in the Gold forum dedicated to the development of a betting system. It is a collaborative tale, spanning more than 800 posts (!), a few of which are offered for your consideration.

The purpose, aside from showcasing one of the less well known elements of the Gold provision (Gold users, you do visit the forum, don't you?!), is to invite readers to think outside of the normal top of the market 'gimme a winner' framework, and instead to go panning for, erm, gold elsewhere.

A post from the weekend looked like this:

**

But there's where the team is at now... THIS is how it all started, a year ago almost to the day. This was Ray's introduction, posted by me...


Matt Bisogno

SINISTER HORSES FOR SINISTER COURSES (A gift from Gold user, MONDO RAY, for my GG buddies on my 70th Birthday, 22 July)

Hi, my name is Ray Thompson, nicknamed Mondo because my idiot but loveable employees back in my shop-owning days refused to believe that the Thompson boys’ FULL given names were Ken, Eddie and Ray. No middle names, no lah-de-dah names, no extras whatsoever. Simples.

You may remember me from classics like “The Tortoise And The Hare” and “Placed To Win”. The first was a free (and profitable) Geegeez tipping service which evolved into the second, an improved but fee-paying service. Placed To Win was short-lived even though it was profit-making. The reason? I may have a degree in psychology, but I’d not factored in how many people don’t care about the occasional winners at 20/1, 25/1, 33/1 and 50/1+, they’d rather have a winner NOW, even if it’s odds-on!

I’d explained to Matt back in the day precisely how my system worked and he was so impressed with it that he agreed to publish it. The name Placed To Win was Matt’s suggestion, as there was also clear profit to be made by the many more placers than winners given, all at a minimum 5 on Betfair.

Hey, I’m just rabbiting on here. What I’d like to do for my birthday is give y’all some of the Essential Things You Should Know in the betting game. I don’t want your money, This is a big thank-you to Matt & Chris for their encouragement and help, their ability to give people faith in themselves, without condescension or beating around the bush (er… is that even legal these days?). As I’m sure you all know, Geegeez is the best thing that’s happened in this field for …ummm… donkeys years!?

Some of you will say I’m stating the bleedin’ obvious at some of these steps, but bear with me and I think you just might be surprised at what you’ve missed, what’s hiding in plain sight. Actually, I will start with the bleedin’ obvious: you want to make money. I want to make money. You want to make BIG money and you’re prepared to find your own system and improve it as you progress. So, whether that means following media tipsters, buying tips or systems from professionals or inventing your OWN system/method, then I want to help you.

My own system took a long time – many years of trial and error (and terror!) – to work satisfactorily, and here’s a thing: it keeps getting better! So, first rule – KEEP ACCURATE RECORDS. As Matt knows from some photos I once sent him, I started scribbling things down in a schoolbook type thing from around the mid-90s until I realised it was pointless. So I bought some sturdy hardback red ‘n’ blacks (they’re not expensive) and kept every single bet, one per line, with the date, the venue code (similar to airport codes, 3 letters per track, eg Ain, Asc, Ayr, Ban, Crl, Crt, Cat, Chl, Chp – you get the drift, found on every form page in the RP’s online service. All my record keeping is done online now of course.

Okay: Date, Course, Race Time, Selection, Industry price, Betfair price, Betfair place, result (again ISP), and BfSP Win after commission. A page one entry 5th Jan 2011 (first winner of that year) reads:

5th Sth 1440 Bromhead 12/1, 19.6, 6. W11/2 +£93.60 (to my £5 stake post(5%)-commission)

That’s a start. I quickly learned that I also needed to record GOING, CLASS, TRIP and possibly one of the most important things you’ll ever learn about picking winners. Ever noticed that when a nailed-on favourite that no tipster or punter can see beyond gets turned over, the shock waves resonate throughout Horseracingland? Tearful telly pundits go into meltdown and yes, even some trainers wonder wtf just happened. A Day Of Mourning is called and the talking heads have an emotional field day.

Well, I know why a large percentage get beat, and it’s to do with the horses mentioned at the top of this piece. Not those sinister horses of the Apocalypse. We know their jockeys are called Conquest, War, Famine and Death. But the horses themselves are more prosaically referred to as White, Red, Black and Pale (or in the Pagan/Christian mashup, Dasher, Dancer, Prancer and Vixen). The Sinister, and their opposites, the Dexter are simply, like most animals, the left- or right-handed. And just a few are ambidextrous.
Lefties perform better and tend to win at left-handed tracks, righties perform better and… you get the gist.

So here’s the big (not so-) secret to improving your choices/selections: Make a note of whether the track is LH or RH before you select your contender, making sure that your choice is not only au fait with the distance, the class, the going, the jockey, the trainer, and the whatever other requirements you er, require, but also, and VERY importantly, it’s at a course that fits your pick’s predilection in running.

During the last year and especially in the Jumps doldrums known as “summer” I’ve begun studying flat and all-weather systems, with a view to developing something equally profitable for the non-jumps season rather than wasting my time drinking cider and bourbon while topping up my tan on the sun-drenched beaches here in Cornwall while applauding the barely-clothed fillies who … erm, I’ll pause there. I’m also prepared to give freely of my jumps system picks along with brief reasons for the choices for the few Summer jump meetings until the NH season proper returns in the Autumn.

Do remember to bet sensibly and, mainly, have fun!

Mondo Ray


fetlock55

Couldn’t agree more about L/H – R/H preferences. To which i’d add Galloping or undulating, particularly relevant when the former doesn’t come in to play (on a straight track!)


Ray Thompson

Sorry about the delay, a little thing called my 70th which included meeting and greeting friends and relatives and some particularly powerful (8.2%ABV) cider all kinda kept me busy until a necessary early night was upon me. So, for the moment, here are MY system selections for today, both at my best-performing summer venue, Worcester. Eight of the 10 system wins here (at BSP: 32, 40, 14, 21, 50, 22, 32 and 19) were in May, June and July, the other two both in Sept (15 & 60). The other jumps meet is at Limerick, a terrific winning track for me but NEVER had a winner in the Summer.

Wor 2.40 My Nosy Rosy ISP 20/1, BSP 32 or take SP at race off, 5.7 BSP
place. This is a chase, and the system is currently 22 points in profit chasing here. (£110 to my fiver stakes, personally I’m only doing win win bets this year, but placers are always profitable too)

Wor 4.55 In The Crowd 25/1, 50(orSP), 6. Hurdles at Wor (as this race is) are showing a profit of 122 pts (£610 to my fiver)

Have fun with these, get on early if you can and BOG if you don’t have a Betfair account yet. Meanwhile, I’ve got an old flat handicap system to show you which I’ll use to show you the flaws in hastily thought-out methods of betting. I’ll be back with that mid-afternoon after my morning stroll.

Enjoy!


Everyone calls me Paul

Cheers Ray. I’m already on Stafford Charlie in the 2.40, so gonna give that race a miss, but I’ve had a small go at the Worcester race (e/w), even though I also have a selection (Wak a Turtle) in that one…but only in a win L15.
Good luck and thanks for your insights. I’ll post in the forum to let everyone know you’re “live” here.
Paul


Ray Thompson

What is wrong with this picture?

Below is a “sample of handicap winners” recorded on continuous days of flat turf racing until the 100 was reached, divided into weights – A being top weight in the race it has won, . The largest field was 29 runners, the smallest 6, with the “vast” majority having 10 plus runners. Identical weights are alphabetically listed on the card, and are thus here depicted. Overweight and apprentice allowances are ignored.

Survey of 100 Flat Handicaps
A 4-1 6-1 7-1 8-1 10-1 16-1
B 9-4 4-1 11-2 7-1
C 5-2 5-1 13-2 13-2 7-1 15-2 10-1 12-1 12-1 16-1
D 6-4 100-30 4-1 9-2 9-2 5-1 6-1 6-1 6-1 13-2 13-2 10-1 12-1 12-1 12-1 14-1
E 3-1 9-2 6-1 13-2 7-1 12-1 14-1
F 6-4 9-2 9-2 11-2 9-1 12-1 16-1
G 13-8 7-1 14-1
H 5-2 3-1 4-1 6-1 11-1 16-1
I 5-2 11-4 5-1 9-1 25-1
J 6-1 7-1 14-1
K 4-1 5-1 13-2 10-1 14-1 16-1 25-1
L 11-2 14-1 33-1
M 2-1 7-1 10-1 11-1 16-1 16-1 20-1
N 11-2 15-2
O 6-1 13-2 12-1 20-1 20-1 20-1 33-1
P 8-1
Q 15-8 3-1 7-1
R 11-2
U 16/1
W 12/1
STVYXZ – no runners

The “system” derived from the above states that those showing “big price” winners are anomalous. Which to me appears to suggest that if we ignore them they’ll probably go away. Also, “There is a very good reason why the top two positions have done relatively badly.” Apparently, this is because the handicapper never forgets and tends to come down hard on any horse showing an exceptional run of form or wins an exceptional race. Hmm, fascinating, ain’t it?

40% of the winners fall in the C to F inclusive band and is therefore the bookies vulnerable point. Really?

This goes on with the following table of prices of winners:
Up to 2-1 5 winners
9-4 to 4-1 14 “
9-2 to 15-2 39 “
8-1 to 10-1 9 “
11-1 to 14-1 17 “
16-1 to 20-1 12 “
22-1 + 4 winners

Therefore, derived solely from SP, the SR is 48% from the 9-2 to 10-1, so this “should be the focus of the punter’s attack.”

My dear fellow GG-ers, your mission should you choose to accept it is to tell me what is right or wrong with this (old, but not as old as me ? ) system, ready for my perusal when I return to Geegeedom on the morrow.

Cheers, guys, and yes, I’ll be giving you MY take on it.


Everyone calls me Paul

Hi Ray,

I’m no expert (and certainly no systems man), but the obvious flaws in the analysis – helped by your hints with the inverted commas – would seem to relate to the fact that there is no specific breakdown of number of entries, leaving a potential bias against the runners / letters in the latter half of the alphabet, and the belief that we’re not supposed to like big priced winners! Don’t know where they’re going with the price range.
Other than that, please tell us, mate.
Paul

NB my system is to back the 15th heaviest horse (“o”) where applicable…124.5 points minimum returned from a maximum – and realistically much lower – 100 points bet. Easy money haha 😉


Tigris

My take is in the groups C to F there are more winners, however am i missing something? But would there not be more loosers in this range therefore yes more winners but, with so many loosers in C to F then this would reduce profit and roi. Yes nice to get the winners but i think i would have to back a lot of loosers to get a winner.
In which case i would be paying the bookies!


Ray Thompson

Thanks for your replies, with which I totally agree.

My first response on reading this system was that 100 consecutive results is nowhere near a meaningful sample! Then, because I tend to concentrate on outsiders, I noticed that from the 40 in the given range, eleven of them (27% of the 40) are priced at 12/1 to 16/1 incl. Now THAT’S an angle worth looking more closely at! Furthermore, 33 of the 100 races were won by 11/1 to 33/1 shots. That, too, is pretty interesting. Another weird (sinister?) thing that I find really hard to accept is the contention that there are NO odds-on shots in 100 winners. Not that the latter fazes me at all, because I’m not really too interested in the bottom half of the spectrum anyway.

As Tigris said, so many losers with that C to F range, and I would reckon that the majority of the field of each race would also be in the 9/2 to 10/1 range, so that leaves us searching for a filter (or filters) to detect a possible winner.

Anyhoo, I’m going to replicate, actually no, I’m going to do a much larger sample than the one we’ve discussed, and from a much more up-to-date year. In fact – with a view to studying a whole year of actual results – I’m thinking 2014 and I’ll start at 1st January of course. I’ll come back to you all when I’ve finished, which might not be today because I have my Friday club this afternoon (A nerds discussion group where we put the world to rights over a pint or three. Members are required to bring to the group a trivia fact every week that none of the rest have heard before. and yes, we all ALL ardent quizzers!)

Back tomorrow with an update. Live long and prosper, as that nice Spock guy used to say.


Ray Thompson

Good afternoon, here for your perusal and comparison are the first 100 results (excluding a dead heat) of last year.

Turf Flat Handicaps 2014
1. 5/4 5/2 5/2 11/4 11/4 3/1 4/1 9/2 9/2 9/1
2. Evs 6/4 7/4 15/8 9/4 9/4 3/1 3/1 4/1 9/2 6/1 10/1
3. Evs 6/4 7/4 7/2 5/1 6/1 10/1 11/1 11/1 12/1 16/1 20/1
4. 3/1 3/1 5/2 9/2 8/1 12/1 25/1 25/1
5. 13/8 3/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 12/1 33/1
6. 3/1 7/2 4/1 4/1 9/2 6/1 7/1 7/1 8/1 14/1 16/1 20/1
7. 2/1 9/4 5/2 9/2 10/1
8. 7/2 9/2 5/1 5/1 5/1 10/1 11/1 14/1 14/1 16/1 16/1
9. 9/4 5/2 3/1 6/1 8/1 12/1 20/1 20/1 33/1
10. 7/2 12/1
11. 13/8 11/4 9/2 7/1 16/1
12. 7/1 8/1 20/1 25/1
13.
14.
15.
16. 7/1 12/1
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23. 12/1

Now, I see huge differences from the old system 100 I showed you earlier.

My reason for wanting to compare the two is that clearly, if we’re to build our own system from scratch, we’re gonna need a bigger boat (metaphorically speaking of course!), a helluva lot more information, facts, stats, filters and so on before we can – to continue the metaphor – launch an unsinkable system that will make us a lot of profit during the remainder of the summer. I bet there are a lot of specialist craftsmen (and women) in GGdom who are experts at (or in) those facts and maths areas of expertise, people who can find things, others who’ll put them together, seers who will predict from the amassed information the possible pitfalls, windfalls and pratfalls, as well as serendipity seekers, opportunity observers, dowsers, speculators, folks who know a good thing when they see it!

Your first 30 days for just £1

Not a lot to ask, is it? 🙂


Tigris

Ray, don’t quite follow this table what does 1 to 23 mean, cannot be months? as there would be 12, perhaps just being thick, but not clear how to read this table?


Ray Thompson

And we’ll need this distribution to figure further percentages.

Up to 2/1 – 11 winners
9/4 to 4/1 – 28
9/2 to 15/2 – 24
8/1 to 10/1 – 9
11/1 to 14/1 – 13
16/1 to 20/1 – 10
22/1 plus – 5


Ray Thompson

Tigris: sorry buddy, this is to match the old system where 1 is top weight on the card, 2 is No.2 on the card etc., down to 23rd on the card. It would’ve helped had the original system given the number of runners in each race, but as it didn’t, then I also left it out of my up-to-date copy of the old ‘un.

I’m glad you brought that up, as it’s yet another fault with the original that I can rectify with my newer figures. I’ll do that this afternoon. Cheers!


Tigris

Got it, my take without putting all this in a spreadsheet, would be to focus on numbers 3 to 9 and bet on horses with prices of between 11/1 and 20/1, this would give most value and ROI, I think.


Tigris

Done a bit more research on Flat Handicaps in the range 2 to 10 weight, and odds 11/1 to 20/1, I discovered a system that has 1 to 2 selection per day and a sr 12%, so quite a few loosing runs, but with bigger prices, with a ROI of 90%, out of interest the system produced a selection tonight: 20:15, Salis, Upstaging, look forward to more of your wise words Ray.


Ray Thompson

My reply yesterday seems to have disappeared! I’ll try again! Tigris, almost there with Upstaging (2nd 8/1).

Field (Runners)
4. 5/2 12/1*
5. 1/1 5/2 3/1
6. 13/8 11/4 12/1*
7. 9/4 11/4 3/1
8. 7/4 9/4 5/2 10/3 7/2 9/2 5/1 6/1 6/1 16/1 16/1
9. 5/4 9/4 3/1 3/1 4/1 9/2 10/1 25/1
10. 1/1 2/1 5/2 3/1 3/1 9/2 9/2 9/2 5/1 6/1 14/1 20/1 33/1
11. 9/4 3/1 7/2 4/1 9/2 9/2 5/1 6/1 8/1 9/1 14/1 16/1 20/1 25/1 33/1
12. 13/8 15/8 3/1 7/2 5/1 6/1 7/1 10/1 12/1 14/1
13. 7/4 5/1 8/1 8/1 11/1 16/1
14. 4/1 7/1 7/1 11/1 20/1 25/1
15. 11/4 7/2 10/1 12/1
16. 9/2 6/1 9/1 12/1 20/1
17. 13/8 5/2 7/1 20/1
18. 7/1 11/1
19. 7/1
20. 4/1
22. 10/1
23. 8/1 12/1
*Rank outsider of race

Here are the wins by class and distance:

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5
5f 2 2* + 2 1* + 1 3
6f 2 1* + 2 1* + 3 1* + 1
7f 1 4 5 2* + 3 1* + 5
8f 1* 4 2* + 3 6
9f 2
10f 2 2* + 3 3* + 2 3* + 3
11f 2 1* 2
12f 1* 1* + 1 2 4
13f 1
14f 2 1
15f
16+ 1* + 1 1*
Tot 1 12 29 27 31

Coming up number of RUNNERS in Outsider Category.

Back soon.


Ray Thompson

Ah poo! It clearly didn’t like my easy-to-read spread and has just crunched them up into an undecipherable mess! Initially, it wouldn’t take a grid with figures in, now it just squishes them all to the left! Ignore that class/distance attempt, then. That’s only a couple of hours work I’ll never get back.

Later!


Tigris

OK Ray, been doing a bit more research and a bit more refining and come up with Tigers Home for 1640 Ayr today. It’s at 12/1 generally.

Been refining a few things and from your stats, could argue to focus on 8 to 12 runner races, and 5f to 8f could be a niche to explore.


sondrio2

tigris, you're on for a gold star mate, top of the class.


Tigris

Thanks sondrio2, i’ll have another attempt today, been refining and triangluating systems so should be fun!


Gallou

I’ve figured it out, it’s all to do with the word ‘sinister’.

Left handed horses for left handed courses.

Job done! 🙂


Tigris

Sinister in deed Gallou!

Have been exploring further Ray, and have been looking at systems based on odds and now have two systems running on different platforms, so the use different paramaters, but what I am attempting to do now us ‘triangulate’ the two systems and looking to see where they identify the sane runners.

System 1 today identified 5 runners and system 2 identified 6 runners.

Three runners were common to both systems, so the two that align with all parameters are:

1410 Bev Generous Dream
1620 Good Lady Gibralter

The next runner met all but the odds check but was so close had to unclude it:

1620 Good Perfect Muse

I would bet three singles to win and two ew doubles for value.

Look forward to your next installment Ray.


Ray Thompson

Okay, here’s the latest. I am a happy bunny. We have a system! Well, almost…

I began by looking at the possible returns from both ISP – Industry (bookies) Starting Price and BSP – Betfair SP if we bet £2 win on every horse in a flat turf handicap race that was 16/1+. Almost there, with 447 bets, that’s an outlay of £894 (not all at once!) The returns were interesting with £596 ISP and £884 BSP returned, or -£298 and -£10 respectively

Now, as the winners were actually 16/1 to 33/1 and not bigger, and with no winners from the top two weights, what about not backing anything bigger than 33/1 and no contenders in the top two weights (1 & 2 on the card)? Well, that’s removing 95 of the bets leaving 342 bets for the same returns! And that, my friends, gives us a 3-week PROFIT of £254 to ISP, or a staggering £542 on Betfair (after commission).

I now only need to run it quickly through the first 100 results for THIS year, for comparison, and on into the rest of the season so far. Personally, I’m also quite happy to start today with the wee £2 win bets, but you guys might prefer to paper-trade until I can get all updated since that first century this year.

In the words of the song, “I’m happy, hope you’re happy too…”

****

Thus, at the end of part one, we have an embryonic system, albeit one based on a very small sample size.

In the next installment, the guys will further shape and refine their system as more information becomes available.

[Important note: don't be too quick to pre-judge this, until you've read the whole serial...]

Back tomorrow with Part 2.

Creating Jockey Ratings: A Few Thoughts

I'm not really sure why I started trying to assign a score to jockeyship. The notion hatched on the rattler to Salisbury last week, where I was going to meet David Probert, geegeez.co.uk's sponsored jockey. I guess, then, that is why...

My apprehension was - and remains - that jockey performance is so dependent on two other major actors, the horse and the trainer, that it is very difficult trying to pare the incidental from the coincidental.

What to measure?

The first question to answer then is 'what to measure?'

Number of wins or places is too simplistic. So is percentage of wins or places. Profit and loss is no more than a basic indicator, which can be heavily skewed by a single big-priced winner.

No, none of these will add much value, if indeed any value can be added from such figures.

Better barometers are percentage of horses beaten and / or performance against market rank.

But perhaps better than all of those is performance against market expectation. For example, even money shots win roughly 45% of the time. Thus any jockey winning on more than 45% of even money shots can be said to be performing above expectation (assuming the sample is of a reasonable size).

There is an inherent problem in that last sentence, one of sample size. Carving all results up into constituent starting prices, such that 10/11 is a different group from even money which in turn is a different group from 11/10 will do little towards achieving remotely representative sample sizes.

Instead, it makes sense to bracket odds together into groups. This will necessarily be arbitrary, but hopefully you'll see the general logic of the groupings.

*

Parameters

I focused on UK flat racing during the 2014 and 2015 seasons, breaking the runners up into the above odds bands. For a jockey to appear in an odds group, he/she had to have ridden at least ten horses with odds in that bracket.

For each odds bracket, we can see the runs, wins, win percent, level stakes loss, places, place percent, number of races, and ROI

I've highlighted three columns - win %, place % and ROI - which will act as baselines.

So, for example, in the 4/1 to 13/2 bracket, horses at those starting prices win 14.37% of the time, place 39.56% of the time, and have a negative ROI of 14.31%.

We can now compare the performance of jockeys to these baseline data, with only those whose record betters at least one of the trio of baselines appearing in the tables.

 

The Shorties...

Let's first look at the shortest odds groups, comprised of odds on and even money chances. In each grouping, I've highlighted in green the columns where the jockey's performance is better than the odds bracket benchmark. For the shorties, though, there is not a great deal of data to go on...

jockey_odds_0.5orless

 

jockey_odds_0.51toEvens

These are generally small samples, and there is little to note with the possible exception of Paul Hanagan's excellent showing across 40+ rides.

*

11/10 to 7/2

Slightly more data now, so a touch more optimism about the meaningfulness of the results.

jockey_odds_1.01to2

jockey_odds_2.01to3.5

 

Plenty of jockeys with a double positive for all three stats here, notably Paul Hanagan (again), Joe Fanning, Adam Kirby, Richard Kingscote, and Paul Mulrennan.

*

4/1 to 10/1

Into the bigger datasets now, and this is a group where some riders will reveal themselves as potential punters' allies.

jockey_odds_3.51to6.5

 

Your first 30 days for just £1

jockey_odds_6.51to10

 

Those appearing in both lists this time are Charles Bishop, William Carson, Paddy Mathers, Frankie Dettori (again), Paul Mulrennan (again), James Doyle, Robert Winston, Ted Durcan, Paul Hanagan (again again!), Harry Bentley, and David Nolan.

*

15/1 to 25/1

Now, just for fun, let's take a look at the bigger priced horses, from 15/1 (or more traditionally 16/1) to 25/1. This table is susceptible to fluke results - one big winner can skew a rider's performance - and should not be taken at face value. Still, it might throw up one or two interesting niblets.

jockey_odds_14.01to25

 

In the context of what's gone before,  it is interesting to note the presence as 'triple green' entries of Paddy Mathers, David Allan and James Doyle (all again, having featured at least in the previous section).

 

**

All good fun, but so what?

At the end of the day, the above reveals something and nothing. It is a circuitous route to demonstrate the lies and damned lies of jockey statistics, with various riders appearing at once brilliant and moderate, depending on which table one focuses.

However, some names do crop up repeatedly. Paul Hanagan and James Doyle could lay claim to being close to the pick of their peer group, based on this means of scoring at any rate; while Frankie Dettori also comes out well. Likewise Joe Fanning and Adam Kirby are seemingly more reliable than many.

Meanwhile, if looking for jockeys on the up - or currently under-rated - these data suggest the likes of Charles Bishop, Paddy Mathers and David Allan all deserve at least a second glance when jocked up.

They are, like the vast majority of jockeys, dependent on the form of their retained stables - in these cases, those of Mick Channon, Richard Fahey and Tim Easterby respectively.

**

At the end of the day, the difference between a horse winning and losing is probably not very often down to the rider, in my opinion. It should certainly be a given that the ability of the horse (duh!) and the trainer - both in conditioning and placing the horse - are of more importance.

Nevertheless, some jocks are better than others, and actual versus expected is a very good way of gauging jockey ability in the market context. In other words, whether jockeys might be profitable to keep onside (regardless of whether their performance is a function of horse and/or trainer form).

Geegeez Gold publishes jockey stats for four different periodicities:

  • 14 Day Form
  • 30 Day Form
  • Course 1 Year Form
  • Course 5 Year Form

For each, users can view both the Actual vs Expected (a figure greater than 1.0 implies a rider's runners are sent off at bigger odds than they should be) and Impact Value.

Impact Value attempts to state the likelihood, compared to the average, of a jockey winning. This is market agnostic (i.e. it doesn't consider the odds in its judgment).

A rider with scores greater then 1.1 for both A/E and IV on a meaningful number of rides is one to keep onside. Here's an example from the racecard, for Paul Mulrennan:

jockeyform_racecard

This view is available to all users of geegeez.co.uk racecards, even those not registered on the website.

For Gold users, our jockey report is a single view digest of all riders competing on a given day, and can be viewed by any of the four periodicities mentioned above.

Here's a filtered example of Monday's riders. In it, I've selected the Course 5 Year Form view, and I've added some filters (100+ runs, A/E and IV of 1.00 or greater)

jockeystats_jimmyfortune

I clicked on J(immy) Fortune's entry to reveal, inline, his rides today. Clicking on any of those line items will take you directly to the race in question. Of the trio, Northern Thunder was a non-runner, Great Fun was second and Irrevocable was a 10/1 third. So, no dice for Jimmy today, but he competed well, as his numbers suggested he would.

Note at the bottom of that quintet of pilots the name of David Allan, the only one with positive figures for both win and each way profit/loss. He's a name I'll be paying closer attention to, albeit towards the end of my form deliberations rather than as a starting point.

From the tables above or, better yet, from the daily jockey statistics report, you can start forming your own educated opinions on the riders worth a few extra pounds, both in terms of weight carried and stakes wagered!

Matt

JOIN GEEGEEZ GOLD

If you've not yet sampled the amazing winner-getting tools and tips inside Geegeez Gold, you can take a 30 day £1 trial by clicking this link.

“Any fool can back 35% winners”

It CAN Be Done!

It CAN Be Done!

In November 2013, I wrote the post below. It remains as pertinent today as it was then. I have, however, updated some of the information - including my own betting profit and loss - to make it current. It's a really important piece, in my opinion, and I hope you get something from it.

**

I've been reading a book by a young Irish fellow called Kevin Blake. It's about betting on horses, and specifically it's about how he made over £40,000 from betting on horses this year on Irish flat racing.

The keys, you may not be surprised to learn, were discipline, selectivity, discipline, form study, discipline, specialization, and discipline.

The book, "It Can Be Done", is a good read and it's full of strong insights.

But it might be a bit lacking in fun.

Most pro backers are serious types who spend much of their time studying the form book and video replays to eke out their profit. In fairness to Kevin, he doesn't fit that archetype at all.

If that sounds a bit dull, then I have some good news. The book was a catalyst for me taking an early look at my own betting profit and loss for the year (I normally do this at calendar year end), and the results were as pleasant as I expected.

In a nutshell, I'm showing a profit of £6,186 [2013 figure] £4,574 from my betting so far this year, 2016, on a turnover of almost exactly £20,000 [2013 figure] £6,871 (which excludes most of a thousand still sitting in accounts). Please note three things:

1. The numbers are shared as context, not (obviously) to gloat (if indeed you might consider them 'gloatworthy')

2. I love a bet, and I have lots of action bets, and I have fun with my betting.

3. I do not bet massive amounts, in terms of stake size.

I want to remind readers of my unshakeable contention that betting for fun and profit is possible, and that these two are not mutually exclusive. And I'll share some of the keys to my philosophy, such as it, in this post.

Key Principle #1: Have fun!

Firstly, I do not set profit targets. My target is to have fun. I set enjoyment targets. That doesn't mean I don't want to win. Of course I do. But if winning is at the cost of entertainment, then I might as well get a job. (You know, a proper job, not goofing about on the internet scribbling a few paragraphs about whatever tickles my fancy).

No, it starts with fun. I'll bet almost every day. Some days, especially on Mondays when the racing is generally desperate, I might have one little bet in the afternoon, or do a placepot for a bit of interest while I'm doing whatever else I'm doing.

On Saturdays, I generally don't bet much because racing outside of the festival meetings is never more competitive than it is on a Saturday.

But on Sunday, and from Tuesday to Friday, I take a keener interest in what's happening.

Key Principle #2: Get V-A-L-U-E

If you still don't 'get' this, you're completely and utterly doomed. Betting 3/1 when you could have bet 4/1 is just plain unfettered idiocy. And, forgive me, if you're still doing this, you're either very rich and are keen to become less rich; or you're a plain unfettered idiot.

Look. You cannot can't CANNOT win if you habitually take under the odds about your fancies, no matter how smart you are. (And, in case you didn't get my, ahem, inference in the above, you're not very smart if you habitually take under the odds about your fancies).

geegeez trumpets the best bookmaker offers because the very best chance you have of winning is to avail of any concession you're still qualified so to do.

Let me put it another way, and this is becoming something of a catchphrase for me. "Any fool can bet 30% winners".

Just grab a betting slip, or pull up a bookmaker site, and etch onto it/tick the box which says 'Fav'. Simple. Dull. Uninspired. And a little bit sad.

It will also ultimately cause a financial death by a thousand cuts. Slow. Insipid. Inexorable.

Actually, in Britain since the start of 2015, that number is up to 35%. So, Any fool can bet 35% winners !

Now don't get me wrong. There are plenty of occasions when a market leader can be a value bet. But simply backing the 'fav' is a mug's game. It's the ultimate mug's game. And if you do it, you're a mug. Get over it, and try something different. You might surprise yourself.

So what is value? Well, you've heard the coin toss example probably a million times. The problem is not 'what is value?', but rather 'how do I identify value?'

And here's a thing: that's an open book of a question. There is no right answer.

Many people say to quantify value, you must create your own 'tissue', or forecast betting odds. That's all well and good, but on what do you base those odds?

I've done it a few times, and it's an interesting exercise for sure. Comparing your tissue with the actual starting prices will tell you what sort of a handle you have on the market.

But generally, I determine value by feel. If that sounds cheap - perhaps even a cop out - then so be it. The fact is, I don't have all the time in the world to review the racing. I run a business akin to a (very) small iceberg, the main visible element of which is this site.

It takes a lot of maintaining. There are a lot of people involved. I have a young son and a lovely partner with whom I want to spend time. And I like beer. Not as much as I used to, but I still like it.

Time is limited for me, as it is for most people. But that doesn't mean we can't bet profitably, and enjoy the process as well. Value is key.

A Shortcut to finding value

By far the biggest blind spot in the early markets is a recency bias. Specifically, a bad run last time out can double a horse's odds. Take Bobs Worth as an example. He was 5/2 for the Gold Cup before disappointing in his prep race. He drifted out to 5/1. Had his chance halved as a result of that seasonal setback?

[From the original article]: Well, time will tell of course, but to my eye he has so many more positive runs to that one negative effort.

And, here's where the concession thing comes in, if he runs poorly again he might not even go for the Gold Cup. So, backing him at top price with a bookmaker offering non-runner free bet, feels like a smart thing to do. My entire Cheltenham ante-post portfolio so far - which is only about six or seven bets - has been struck with BetVictor, with no bet bigger than the £50 limit on that free bet concession.

Why would I bet anywhere else if they're matching the top price? To do so shows at best a lack of value acumen, and at worst, plain unfettered idiocy. 😉

The point: look beyond a bad run, especially if there's a probable reason for the bad run. Ground, trip, fitness, pace setup, missing the break, whatever. If a horse failed to get his normal luck in running - or ideal race conditions - last time, there's a good chance the market has under-estimated that horse's chance today, assuming race conditions are more in its favour this time.

[Post script: Bobs Worth didn't win the Gold Cup, but he was sent off the 6/4 favourite. 5/1? About a 6/4 shot? Any and every day, please.]

Another shortcut to finding value

Check the bookmaker concessions. Check the best odds available. And be sure to bet at the best odds available, and the best concessions. For as long as you can before they close you down.

I've got a good few winning accounts, and a few losing accounts. For whatever reason, I've only got one restricted account. [Update: I've got several more restricted accounts now]

If you don't currently have an account with the firm offering the best price, open an account with them. Here are three reasons why:

1. You'll get the best odds on your fancy today

2. They'll almost certainly give you some free bet bait to sign up (always great when you were going to sign up anyway)

3. Next time they're top price, you won't have to faff about.

 

Key Principle #3: "Let The Bet Make You"

There's this American bloke called Michael Pizzola. He writes about racing, and he lives in Las Vegas, and he lounges in the racebooks (betting shops) there. He writes very, very articulate and compelling books, and some of his core ideas are generic. One I really like is his strap line, "Let The Bet Make You".

What he means is simply that if you don't fancy something in a race, don't have a bet. You don't have to bet. You won't stop breathing if you don't bet. Most days, you won't even have to wait more than ten minutes for another wagering opportunity.

If you really must have a bet when you don't have an opinion, make it a very small bet. When it wins, you can buy a cup of tea and a sticky bun. When it loses, you won't kick yourself too hard.

That's the thing about discipline: it doesn't need to be a straightjacket. It's your leisure pound, and you can spend it as freely as you choose. But once it's spent, it's spent. Unless you backed a winner. Bet more when you have more of a view. But never bet too much.

Key Principle #4: Contrast is Key

Have you seen the Instant Expert reports on this site? You know, the traffic light thingies, with loads of numbers on them. The idea is that they'll help you see, at a glance, horses in a race which are suited by today's going, class, course, distance and field size, and that may be handicapped to win.

The amber and red box outlines are deliberately similar colours, in order to accentuate the dark green boxes which symbolize a positive profile.

The ideal situation is a horse which has a line of dark green in a race where very little else can offer much, if any, of that verdant hue. Next best is one with green and amber where most are red or grey. Here's an example from later today, 10th May 2016:

Double Czech looks well suited to conditions, while plenty of others may not be...

Double Czech looks well suited to conditions, while plenty of others may not be...

 

With the ground having changed to good to soft, soft in places; and with more rain forecast, it could easily be soft by race time. Double Czech should relish that, and has great course form too. He also has the best speed rating in the field, though that's irrelevant for the purposes of this example. Let's just stick to the colours. DC is green and amber all the way. His rivals are almost all red with occasional blobs of amber (and Zaria's impressive 3 from 3 course record).

Your first 30 days for just £1

Double Czech is 7/2 as I write. He might not win, but that looks too big. I've had a cheeky £20 on him with a Best Odds Guaranteed bookmaker. He might be favourite. I've backed the favourite. He looks a value bet, irrespective of the outcome.

 

Summary

The point of this piece was/is not to gloat about winning at betting. After all, the tools on this website make winning from betting a distinct possibility.

And anyway, let's face it, there are plenty of people out there with far more to gloat about than me (though most don't have nearly as much fun 😉 ).

Rather, what I've tried to outline is a vague blueprint for profitable and enjoyable betting.

Profitable and enjoyable betting.

Those are the cornerstones of what geegeez is about.

Finally, in case you're interested, here's the summary of my betting activities, based on a sanitized download of my bank statement (i.e. I removed the occasional non-betting bank transaction - you know, like the mortgage, and the electricity bill).

N.B. The first image is from the original post, the second from May 2016's updated variant.

Betting P&L 2013

Betting P&L 2013

 

A good year so far...

2016: a good year so far...

 

There may be some who don't believe these accounts to be true, and frankly I've long since grown tired of the trolls that hide behind their screens in cyberspace, so I won't be saying anything further than that I can assure you this is the full and complete record of my wagering deposits and withdrawals...

...except, as I mentioned above, that it doesn't include things like the £1,000-odd I have in various bookie accounts, or the £500 of unsettled football bets I have to come (placed last year, so 'kind of' irrelevant in this context anyway). 😉

I use Geegeez Gold. Obviously. I built it to suit my needs as a recreational punter who likes to win.

It seems to suit the needs of these guys, too...

 

160508_InstantExpert_FFFv2

 

160506_H2H_20to1

 

testimonial160412_14_1and11_2double

 

testimonial160412_yankeedandy2

 

testimonial160412_yankeedandy

 

testimonial160308_66_1winner

 

testimonial160221_GoldAptlyNamed

 

And these guys do as well...

 

testimonial151224_faultless

 

testimonial151231_bigpricedwinnersatisfying

 

testimonial150823_delighted

 

testimonial150812_confidenceandbelief

 

testimonial150805_helplesswithoutGold

 

I have over 100 such emails in a file, and probably twice as many again that I've not captured from email into images.

People like you are using Gold in lots of ways to have fun...

...and they're backing big-priced winners. And they're making their betting pay.

Good luck with your betting. First and foremost, enjoy it.

And if you've any tips for readers on how to improve their own bottom line or fun factor, leave a comment below, and share your investment advice!

Matt

p.s. Although I love the buzz of backing a good winner, especially one that most people could never find in a hundred years, I also enjoy converting profit into good times. That 2016 number above - £4,574 - had already booked a two week family holiday for my family to Lake Garda in the Summer (yes, I'll be trying to take a few days off!).

And last night, it booked my flights to California for the Breeders' Cup at Santa Anita later in the year. It's not 'profit': it's hotels, flights, days out, calorific dinners, extravagant bottles of wine, and so on.

Again, indulge me for the point, please. The first thing is to enjoy betting on horses. The second thing is to stop losing so much, then to stop losing. After that, it's all gravy. Or jus if that's your thing.

p.p.s. Want to know more about what's inside Gold? Take a look at this page.

JOIN GEEGEEZ GOLD

If you've not yet sampled the amazing winner-getting tools and tips inside Geegeez Gold, you can take a 30 day £1 trial by clicking this link.

The Handicapping Process: An Approach

The horse's name, the colour of the jockey's silks, a favourite number. These are all legitimate ways to choose a horse to bet. Sadly, they are all destined to be long-term losers for the committed (i.e. should be committed) follower.

As a reader of geegeez.co.uk, you obviously already know that, and are probably adopting a more scientific approach - occasionally if not consistently - to your handicapping endeavours.

In this post, I'd like to offer a few thoughts on the handicapping process: on how to find a horse to bet. The key word in the title is the smallest word in it - "an" - for there is no right or wrong way to handicap a horse race. There are better and worse ways, most being better than names, colours and lucky numbers.

Whilst on the subject of definitions, let me touch on what I'm trying to achieve with "the handicapping process". I'm not trying to find the most likely winner. I'll write that again, to be clear: I am NOT trying to find THE MOST LIKELY winner. Not necessarily, at least.

Rather, I am trying to eke out a long-term profit from backing horses whose chances are under-estimated by the market. In other words, I'm looking for VALUE. There will be no lecture, or even expansion, on the concept of value in this post - it has been covered ad nauseum elsewhere, including on this blog here (amongst other entries).

A better question than "What is value?" is always "How do I know if I've got value?". The answer to that second, more real world, question can be found on the balance of your betting ledger after a year. If it is positive, chapeau, you're on your way. If not, fear not, but pledge to work on your handicapping technique.

So, here follows an approach to the handicapping process. It is not the only approach, nor will it be the best or even necessarily an optimal one. But it has worked for me, and it may work for you too.

 

Why we need a handicapping process

As soon as one engages with the handicapping process, it is no longer enough to pick from the top two or three in the market based on the string of numbers to the left of a horse's name. A majority of horse racing punters have been conditioned into that by the presentation style of race cards in newspapers and on-course race day literature since forever.

It's just not that simple. It can't be, can it? Sure, if you don't keep score that will provide enough winners to convince the self-delusional that they're in front. But here is the cost of following the head of the market, in cash terms, since the start of 2015 in all UK and Irish races.

 

The wagering equivalent of self-harm.

The wagering equivalent of self-harm.

 

Backing the top favourite in all UK and Irish races since the start of 2015 would have led to a winning bet bang on one in three wagers. And a loss of 8% will give you plenty of fun before you inevitably go skint.

As can be seen, the second and third market choices win roughly the same amount of races combined as does the favourite. But the financial cuts are deeper: self-mutilation versus punting masochism.

That is not to say that there is never value at the top of the market. On the contrary, there may often be more value there than anywhere else in the list of runners and prices. It is how we sift that decides our degree of success.

For many, bizarrely, the need for winners is predominant. A need for vindication, to be proven correct, to solve the puzzle, trumps the quest for profit. There are thousands - probably millions - of punters who are happy to "BOOM!!!!!!!" after 'nailing' a 4/6 winner (that should have been even money in any case). If you need confirmation of that, just search 'boom' on twitter any afternoon during racing.

The good news is that, for those of us who prefer to eat less often, but gorge ourselves when we do, figuratively and relatively at least, those bombastic boomers butter our bread.

 

A Process of Four Parts

The approach I'm about to set out consists of four elements. It starts in a place where most punters don't go. And it ends in a place where most punters - casual punters at least - start.

The four parts are thus:

- Race

- Horses

- Actors

- Market

By looking at the race conditions, its shape, and its apparent competitiveness, we can take an early view on whether it is playable or not. Although that view will sometimes be incorrect, choosing the right battles is of paramount importance.

A bookmaker has to price up - or at least lay pre-race market odds - on every race. As punters, we can be as discerning as we wish. Only if we like the look of a race do we have to step forward to look more closely at the horses.

When looking at the horses, we can split them into three main groups: OBVIOUS contenders, CONCEALED possibles, and UNLIKELY winners. Note that there is no "no hoper" group. Any horse can win any race: our objective is to measure a proposition in terms of price and prospects.

Or, to put it another way, to establish if a horse is over- or under-priced against the chance we perceive it has.

Where a race is comprised of horses with many form lines already in the book, most of the evidence can be found therein. However, in races where there is less form - maidens, novice events, and early forays into handicap or Group class - a consideration of actors should be made.

By "actors", I mean trainers especially, but also jockeys and, sometimes, owners. What do we know about their past performance that could impact on the ability of a horse to show a different level of form in today's race context? As a consequence of this analysis, our three groups - obvious, concealed, unlikely - may be re-shuffled.

Finally, a decision to bet can only ever be based on the availability of a compelling offer in terms of the horse's or horses' perceived chance(s). Thus the market is the final arbiter of whether a bet is struck or not.

We are far from the realms of rocket science at this stage, but the steps in the process - and, importantly, their sequence - are worth the time to outline. Having done that, let's step through things in a touch more detail.

 

Step 1: The Race

Understanding race parameters is a crucial first stage in the handicapping process. Race distance, class, the going (especially in changeable weather), are just some of the more obvious factors to bear in mind. So the first question to answer is,

"What do we KNOW about the race?"

We know the course it will be run on.

We know the race distance (give or take a few yards for unadvertised rail movements, etc)

We know the class of the race

By post time, we will know the number of runners (barring very late withdrawals).

Everything else, we perceive. We think we know. And that's fine as long as we know we don't absolutely know. If you see what I mean.

We perceive the state of the ground. The going is arguably the most important least scientifically recorded element in horse racing today. Whilst most people who bet even remotely seriously think that needs to change - as do horsemen and, well, anyone who doesn't run a racecourse - the official going remains a very unreliable piece of 'data'.

So what do we know about the going? Well, we know the weather forecast for the day, which can help us understand going changes before they're announced. And, after race one, we will know both the race time and the horses who performed well and/or poorly. From that we can make some educated guesses as to the state of the surface. In the land of the blind, and all that...

As you'll have noted, there is actually very little we can unequivocally 'know' about a race. Even things which ought to be unambiguous - the race distance, the number of runners, and, to a lesser degree, the going - may not be quite as they seem.

Happily, predicting the outcome of horse races rarely involves a microscope or an atom-splitter (whatever one of those might be). Thus, reasonable approximations normally suffice:

If there were ten runners but one was withdrawn at the start, it will likely only affect the rate of return on a successful bet (unless that horse is a key to the pace of the race - more in a mo). If the race was advertised as six furlongs, but a rail movement added ten yards, only in the closest finish will that have a material impact.

When it comes to going, we should rely on our own awareness more than the official report. If the going is reported as good, but we know it has been raining for three hours in the morning (or is forecast to do so), then we do not need to wait for the revised going statement after race one, nor for the further revision after race two. Successful handicapping is about leading not following, and about taking calculated risks others might not take.

"About what can we have a reasonable opinion in the race?"

There are three things about which I want to have a reasonable opinion if I'm betting in a race. First, competitiveness: how many horses are coming into the race with obvious credentials? Are there horses with 'back class'?

Based on the first point, do I think the favourite/head of the market is opposable?

Unrelated to points one and two, is there a distinct shape to the pace in the race?

Looking at your average race card, either in the newspaper, race programme, or online, won't reveal much. But there are some tools - and of course Geegeez Gold is one - that offer a lot of answers to these questions.

Competitiveness

The answer to the competitiveness question can be found on this site most simply in a view called Instant Expert. Here's an example of a competitive-looking race. [N.B. What looks competitive may not transpire that way; and, of course, the converse is also true].

 

Lots of green and amber on the Instant Expert suggests many are suited by conditions

Lots of green and amber suggests many are suited by conditions

 

This is a form profiling tool which aims to visualize the historical performance of all runners in a race against today's conditions. The presence of a significant amount of green and amber implies that this could be a competitive race, whereas what we may ideally be interested in are races that look uncompetitive at first glance. As I've said, they may not turn out that way, but it is a better starting point, especially when the market leader(s) is/are not ideally suited to conditions.

Here's an example of an ostensibly less competitive race:

 

Lots of red, not much else, implies one or two might be better suited than the rest.

Lots of red, not much else, implies one or two might be better suited than the rest.

 

In this instance, one horse - Most Honourable - looks significantly better suited to conditions than its rivals. Note that the example is based on 'win' data, where 'place' data may give a more rounded perspective.

At this stage it is important to say that I don't restrict my betting solely to uncompetitive races, for two reasons: firstly, there are plenty of other ways to whittle a field; and secondly, I'd have no problem with backing more than one horse in a race, if the prices were right.

There is more on Instant Expert and the contrast principle here.

'Opposability'

The next opinion I want to form is whether the top of the market should sensibly be opposed. The key to value often lies in spotting a weak or false favourite. If there are solid reasons for looking beyond a 2/1 market leader, there could be plenty to go at elsewhere in the field.

We're wandering into element two, horse form, here so let's sit tight a while longer but, as you can imagine, the elements are intrinsically linked.

Race Shape

It is amazing to me that, even in 2016, most British and Irish punters don't give the shape of a race a second thought. Some will talk about draw bias in flat races, but generally without any real awareness of the difference between draw, pace and track biases.

Most however won't even go that far. Again, as a geegeez.co.uk reader, you can consider yourself ahead of many putting cash into the market, and you are hopefully already looking at the influence of pace in shaping a race. Geegeez Gold has two tools currently - soon to be improved/combined - for looking at pace and draw.

Let's take a look at some draw data for the five furlong distance around Chester's famously tight bullring circuit.

 

A very strong draw bias exists at the five furlong distance around Chester's track

A very strong draw bias exists at the five furlong distance around Chester's track

 

The top chart and table displays the draw information in thirds, the bottom view shows the individual draw output. Both reveal an almost linear relationship between proximity to the rail and chance of, in this case, getting placed (note the dropdowns on the charts are set to place%).

A low draw then can be considered an advantage at Chester, especially when amplified by a pace-pressing run style. The Geegeez Gold pace tab reveals the early running position of the field in their last four UK or Irish races. Here's the Gold pace view for the same race, sorted by draw.

 

A low draw and prominent run style is favoured at Chester

A low draw and prominent run style is favoured at Chester

 

This view looks complicated but it's really not. It shows, on the left hand side, the runner number, draw position, recent form figures, silks, horse name, trainer and jockey names; and on the right side, the last four pace scores (LR = last run, 2LR = second last run, etc), the total score, the percentage of the pace in the race, the master speed rating, and current odds.

Pace scores are from 4 to 1, as follows: 4 led, 3 prominent, 2 mid-division, 1 held up. Thus a horse may be scored from 16 (led in each of its last four races) to 4 (held up in each of its last four races) for four completed UK/Irish runs.

The above shows us that one of the (almost) guaranteed pace horses - Seve - is quite well drawn in stall five. Meanwhile, the other habitual front runner, Green Door, has been allotted a car park stall in 13: probably unlucky for him.

Three things worth noting in this particular example are:

  1. The market looks quite strongly influenced by draw. Boxes 1-4, those closest to the rail, are the first four in the betting, while 12-15, those furthest from the rail, are the outsiders of the field.
  2. Horses that do not normally chase the early pace may change their run style given a favourable draw. In that context, the likes of Roudee, Mukaynis and Kimberella could be gunned from the gate in order to take best advantage of their inside draw.
  3. Although the race does not look overloaded with pace on the face of it, the prospect of inside duels could set things up for a later running horse. Based on a cursory look, I don't expect that to happen, but it is something to keep in mind when framing races like these.

In any case, what I would be reasonably confident of is that Seve, with a slow starter on his inside, will be on or close to the pace at the first turn. That alone could make him moderately interesting at around 14/1.

 

Step 2: The Horses

By now, we understand something about the race - how competitive it is, whether the favourite looks vulnerable, and how the early part of proceedings might pan out. It's high time, then, that we got our hands dirty with the form book, drilling down into the horses themselves.

You may remember I referred to three groups of runners in my introduction: OBVIOUS contenders, CONCEALED possibles, and UNLIKELY winners. A horse from any group may win the race, but this is about a rough classification of their prospects.

OBVIOUS Contenders

As the name suggests, these will generally be horses whose chance screams from the pages of the form book. As such, odds will generally be somewhat compressed. Generally, but not universally. Examples of OBVIOUS contenders include last time out winners running under similar conditions; horses reverting to well-touted favourable conditions; and runners from big stables and/or ridden by high profile jockeys.

Let's look again at our example race, that five furlong heat from Chester.

 

An open handicap, but some runners are more 'obvious' than others...

An open handicap, but some runners are more 'obvious' than others...

 

This is quite an open race, if the betting is any measure, with best prices showing 6/1 the field. The OBVIOUS horses in this race might be the well drawn winners within two starts Roudee, Mukaynis, and Avon Breeze.

With no Frankie Dettori or Ryan Moore, and no Sir Michael Stoute or Aiden O'Brien, there are no jockey/trainer entries of a very obvious nature. But that trio of well-drawn in-form horses merits closer inspection at the prices, especially given what we know about the mountain wide drawn horses typically have to climb in this context.

Roudee first. Here, I've used the new Full Form Filter version 2.0 (or FFFv2 for short) to look at course and distance form. [Click on any image to view full size, and without blur]

 

Roudee has very solid course and distance form

Roudee has very solid course and distance form

 

As you can see, Roudee has won over course and distance, and been placed second twice, on a range of going. Indeed, the win was at this meeting last year off a rating of 85. Today's mark is 94, nine pounds higher. However, it is worth noting the running line for Roudee that day: he ran loose to post having unseated the rider, and was drawn widest of the five runners. He still managed to win. That suggests he had a fair bit in hand.

And again, when second last June, he was drawn second widest of the seven runners. He has led too, so it looks as though a lot is in Roudee's favour in spite of that high rating.

Mukaynis comes here off a second place last time out and a win on his final run of 2015. He's run twice at Chester, over six furlongs and a mile, the mile effort (three years ago) proving the better effort. However, in four more recent spins over this trip, he's finished 4142, the second placed finish being the only turf start.

Your first 30 days for just £1

With a tendency to fluff the start on occasion - something which is hard to overcome at Chester - he's not as attractive a proposition as the inside drawn Roudee.

As for Avon Breeze, she's won five of her 16 five furlong turf races, including two of her last four at that range. But all her Class 2 form - today's grade - has been over six furlongs and she may just found herself outpaced early, and possibly crowded out as a consequence. Her quote of 10/1 just about accommodates that concern, but with little latitude to my eye.

So I'd still be interested in 6/1 about Roudee of the OBVIOUS horses at this stage.

 

CONCEALED Possibles

The next bunch are the CONCEALED possibles. They are usually made up of two types of runner: those near the head of the market with no recent form - in the image two up, ordered by market rank, look at Growl, Kimberella and Lexi's Hero; and those whose chance becomes evident from a look at form profiles or the race shape.

That latter angle throws the pace-pushing Seve into the CONCEALED possibles group, along with Blithe Spirit.

Scanning through these, I can quickly see that all of Growl's placed form has come in fields of six or fewer runners. This double digit cavalry charge won't obviously suit him, and at 5/1 or so he's overlooked in spite of the Doctor (Marwan Koukash, owner and huge supporter of Chester races) Factor. It's worth noting that he's generally tardy at the gate and has never run over five furlongs before. Whilst he could improve for it, the worries make him no sort of price to be finding out.

Kimberella is a course winner at a furlong further, and has won at York over this trip. He's reasonably treated on his best form, but five and a half furlongs might just be his best trip, and he also has a slovenly tendency when the stalls open (though he did ping them when winning at York). 6/1 is unappetising to my palate.

Most interesting perhaps is Lexi's Hero. At eight, he's getting on a bit now, and his form last season - debut win aside - was pretty moderate. However, that 2015 debut win was over course and distance - in this race in fact - and with similarly 'nothing' form figures. Rated 87 then, he's down to 83 now, with Sammy Jo Bell's three pound claim a further lightening of the load, to 80. But he was drawn four then, and is in box nine this time.

11/1 recognises all of those truths, and a charmed run will likely see this occasionally talented lad go close.

Seve has no recent form but may get the run of things on the front end. Trained, like Roudee, by local handler Tom Dascombe (of whom more shortly), Seve is three from ten at the trip, and has been placed in six of those ten runs. His two Chester efforts comprise a maiden win, and a close fourth in a Class 3 handicap, both at today's minimum distance.

Although well beaten in his most recent pair of runs, he has had a nice break and went well on his only prior start after two-plus months off. He'd be on the shortlist at 14/1.

Last in the CONCEALED group is Blithe Spirit. A veteran of seven course and distance sprints, this lad has form of 2411491 in that context. Drawn eight - sub-optimal but not impossible at the right price - he was down the field in this race last year, but his overall profile begs for a second chance. 16/1 grants it.

UNLIKELY Winners

The rest - Confessional, Noble Storm, Masamah, Lucky Beggar (a non-runner in any case), Lexington Place, Green Door and Snap Shots  - are bracketed together in the UNLIKELY winners group.

In the case of Confessional, Noble Storm and Masamah, it is the combination of very poor draw (15, 10 and 12 respectively) and the passage of time that undermines their chance. Masamah and Confessional actually won this race in 2010 and 2012 respectively, the latter also running second last year.

Lexington Place has run well in defeat in his only two class and distance races, though probably wants the ground a touch faster. Snap Shots is a third string to Dascombe's bow, but he ran poorly on his only start here when eight lengths behind Roudee. Stall eleven hardly assists his claim.

Green Door has been unlucky with the draw, Robert Cowell's early speedster getting stall 13. Still, his gate speed should enable him to grab something of a position and, if he can break more alertly than Masamah on his immediate inside, there are five habitual late runners inside of that one. That could give him a midfield sit, and this former Group 2-winning juvenile (when with Olly Stevens) has plenty of 'back class'.

A winner of his last five furlong race in Britain (he's been running without much success in Dubai through the winter), the draw issue is clearly a big hindrance to his chance. But, with a fair shot at getting a reasonable early position, 33/1 might justify a piece of a portfolio wager (i.e. a bet covering a number of horses in the race).

**

Phew! Recap Time

This is a long post, because I want to talk theory and practice. If it seems involved, well, to some degree it is. If you want to make good bets, based on a solid understanding of the race, the runners, the actors and the market, it takes time. But with tools specifically designed for the job, it doesn't take that much time.

In fact, if I wasn't writing and explaining my way through this, I reckon I'd have spent little more than quarter of an hour to get to where we are so far.

And remember, the first thing we do is look at the race and make a call on whether we want to take a deeper dive. Generally speaking I'd leave a race like this alone, unless it was part of a big placepot pool I was targeting (as it will be - hint hint 😉 )

But it makes for a great example race, so that's that.

OK, things move a little quicker now.

 

Step 3: The Actors

Step three is about the 'actors': trainers, jockeys and sometimes owners. For the most part this is about trainers for me. However, at quirky tricks like Chester's very tight oval, jockeyship can be more important than at more run-of-the-mill circuits. And at this particular track more than most, one owner - Dr Marwan Koukash - is hellbent on getting winners.

Trainers first, and let's take another look at the Geegeez racecard:

 

Trainer pointers galore, both inline and at-a-glance

Trainer pointers galore, both inline and at-a-glance

 

Firstly, have a squint at the trainer/jockey column. Notice the little green alphanumeric combinations? They denote trainer form, 14 day, 30 day, Course 1 Year, Course 5 Year - and are an instantly digestible measure of who is hot.

Next, look at the horizontally highlighted box. That contains the underlying data from which the green form icons are generated.

In a less Geegeez-specific, more handicapping process-generic focus, we are trying to ascertain whether any given trainer performs especially well at the course, and/or is in good form right now. The level of information here shows overall performance, but form students might care to look specifically at trainer performance with sprinters (or whichever distance range is relevant) or, on extremes of going, with runners on that type of test.

In the example above, Tom Dascombe has a lot of Chester winners, but historically they've failed to pay for the losers. This is a microcosm of the perennial punters' challenge: do you want winners? Or profit?

Dascombe will deliver winners at Chester, as sure as night follows day. But we need to know if they will pay for the losers, and leave a bit over to butter our bread. The answer over five years is that they won't, Tom D's 24 winners coming from a whopping 206 runners, for a level stakes loss of 53.54 points.

More recent evidence, however, offers greater hope. He's done well in the last year and, materially, he's in good form right now.

In some instances, a trainer's form - either current or long-term at the track - can be a stronger pointer to a horse's chance than the horse's own form. In this case, it is probably slightly positive to the chances of Dascombe's trio of runners, without adding notable ballast to the form credentials of those horses. However, importantly, nor is his form a negative.

Contrast that with the form of Dandy Nicholls and Kevin Ryan, as seen below.

 

In form, or not? Actors are important factors in the handicapping process...q

In form, or not? Actors are important factors in the handicapping process...

 

Nicholls has had just one winner from 17 runners in the last fortnight, is 0 from 7 at the track in the past year, and three from 62 in the last five years. His place record at the course hardly offers hope either.

Kevin Ryan has a less than 8% win record in the last fortnight, though his place form is consistently fair (only fair, mind). Importantly, note the sea of red in the P/L columns, and the A/E (actual vs expected) of, generally, a lot less than one. These are complementary pointers to the general lack of value in these trainers' runners.

In the future, we are planning to introduce more contextual form into these inline boxes, covering things like the trainer's record first time in a handicap, or off a layoff, or a trainer switch, or with an unraced horse, or with a trip increment, or with a last time out winner.

The form line will only display when it is relevant - e.g. if a horse won last time, the trainer's record with last time winners will be displayed; if it didn't, it won't.

Trainer form is always important. When a trainer is hot, it can be a solid supplement to a middling horse's prospects. When it is cold, it can be, well, cold water to pour on the warmest fancy. Pay heed to stable form.

**

This same information is available on geegeez.co.uk for jockeys, and most of it is available for no charge. At Chester, it is quite well known that Fearless Franny Norton is the 'go to' guy. His winner record emphasises that.

Fearless Franny, Chester's main man...

Fearless Franny, Chester's main man...

He has both course icons, and a closer inspection of the inline form box shows he's actually in pretty good recent form too. Of course, he's riding for Nicholls, so one has to balance the various forces and make a judgement call on which is stronger when they're not pushing or pulling in the same direction, as this pair are not.

In this case - in most cases - it will be the price that determines which way to go. 6/1 is a no thank you for me, Franny or no Franny.

Dr Koukash has three in this race, and he'll have thirty-odd runners in three days on Chester's Roodee course, his eleven entries on the opening day attesting to that. Owner angles are not really my thing, except to look out for well-supported horses when connections are known to like a punt.

Sadly, this info is not available on geegeez.co.uk - nor anywhere else to my knowledge - but we are starting to gather data which could be used to this end, at some point.

Trainer form is especially important in races where there is little or no horse form - maiden races, unexposed handicaps, and the like. There, how a handler has performed in the specific context is often a huge 'tell' as to whether a horse might step forward markedly on previous racecourse evidence. This post about handicap first-timers is a must read if you've not seen it already (or even if you have - it's one of the best I've written, for what it's worth).

Step 4: The Market

If you pay more than you should, you'll go skint. I could leave it at that, but allow me to expound on that somewhat pithy statement. It is basically about getting paid a fair rate for one's endeavours.

Here's a question: when you spend twenty minutes, or an hour, or however long, researching a bet, how much do you want to get paid for it?

Let's say your normal bet size is £10 (it doesn't matter what it is, it's all relative), and you have the option to get paid £50, £60 or £70, which would you choose? I think you'll probably be with me and want £70 if you have the option.

And now what if you could get paid £70 flat rate, or £70 with a possible bonus for good (counter-market) research; which would you choose then?

Naturally, you'd opt for the potential of a bonus, all other things being equal. So, please tell me,

WHY THE HELL DON'T YOU HAVE ALL THE AVAILABLE BOOKMAKER ACCOUNTS AND ALWAYS USE BEST ODDS GUARANTEED WHEN YOU CAN?!!

Note: I know many of you do, and I know many of you can no longer avail of such concessions. But, for those who can but don't, this is like "winning at betting 101". If you continually under-value your efforts in this way, you are sabotaging your own bottom line. It's stupid and you shouldn't do it. So, please, for your sake, don't.

*puts soap box away (somewhere close by, will need it again soon)*

BOG is not the only option in town, and betting to win is not the only wagering option either. It is not within the province of this post to talk about 'bad each way', bookmaker arbitrage, or any of the other free money opportunities that will get you barred faster than a rocket-powered penguin (don't ask me, I was looking for a metaphor on google...)

But you should know that there are other marketplaces outside of bookmakers. If you don't need to get on early for fear of missing the price, then exchanges are a very good option, with plentiful liquidity in the immediate pre-race period. Tote pools are less attractive, for win and/or place betting at least. But they do have their, erm, place.

Exotic bets are an excellent way to compound value, by overlaying one opinion (say, the winner of a race, or a horse to make the frame in a race) with other opinions (the second horse in the race, to make an exacta; or a horse to place in five further races, a placepot).

The more you can balance the probable with the possible, the better your chances of long-term success. That is to say, the more you can recognise the strength (or weakness) of market leaders, and consequently when to go deep and when play tight, the better the punter you will become.

But it is all for nought if you fail to take the very best odds available to you.

Let's return to our example race, and the shortlist I tentatively drew up...

OBVIOUS: Roudee, prevailing odds 6/1

CONCEALED: Lexi's Hero 11/1, Seve 14/1, Blithe Spirit 16/1

UNLIKELY: Green Door 33/1

These prices are all Best Odds Guaranteed so, if I wanted, I could dutch them (i.e. back them all to achieve the same return, regardless of which one wins) at very close to 13/8 (£10 total stake returns £26.24).

In so doing, I would achieve a minimum profit of £16.24 for my example £10 stake. With BOG in my corner, that figure would grow if the starting price was greater than the price I took about any of the quintet.

But I don't think they each have an equivalent chance, and nor do I think they all represent the same value proposition. So I'd rather gear my stakes towards those I prefer: those I think have a greater disparity between their market price and their true chance.

I actually quite like Roudee (cue terrible run!) and think he should be closer to 4/1 with so much in his favour. From the same in-form stable, Seve appeals, as well, and I'd be happy to get the lion's share of any profit jam from that pair of well-berthed Dascombe dynamos.

So why not dutch this pair with £8, for a profit of £28.18 if either wins (total return, £38.18), and split the other £2 between the rest. Dutching that trio would guarantee a profit of £1.66 (return of £11.66) for a winner.

Now my preferred pair are worth £28.18 to me, as opposed to £16.24 in the first example. Of course, the lesser fancied trio barely cover the cost of the tea bag, let alone the hot water, should one of them prevail, but they do at least preserve the bank.

It was not really my intention to go into staking, so the above is what it is: an example of how one could play the shortlist. You might choose to back Roudee, as the main fancy; or to bet another each way, or to play an exacta combo, or whatever.

This is about the shortlisting process - the handicapping process - and it is but one approach to that infinitely-faceted conundrum.

 

Final Thoughts / Summary

Handicapping horses takes in as many elements of the narrow and broad fields of vision as the player chooses. For me it majors on four elements - the race, the horses, the actors, and the market.

Some people swear by ratings. I do not. Some people follow the money. I respect it, but generally have little desire to attend a wagering funeral having missed the wedding. I will, however, look to understand why a horse might have been backed.

Others follow the top of the market, or trainer form, or favourite jockeys, or last day winners, or whatever, in isolation.

But handicapping horse races effectively is a symphony performed by an orchestra of different sections, each bringing something significant to the composition, none especially pleasing of themselves. Together, there can be harmony - and sometimes discord - but the sum of those four sections is usually greater than any individual contribution.

The above may seem complex to the casual bettor, but with the right tools, and even average race selection in step one, the process will quickly become second nature.

I built Geegeez Gold to support this handicapping framework. With help from a small but dedicated development team, and suggestions from you, our passionate user, we are continuing to build.

This week sees a big change and a couple of small changes. The introduction of Full Form Filter v2.0 - showcased briefly in the above - is a size 13 step forward in terms of filtering form for all of horses, trainers, jockeys and stallions. Less significant but still useful, we're finessing our draw output; and have finally accounted for non-runners on the pace tab, updating the pace percentages accordingly.

In my opinion, the handicapping process should be fun. There are too many dry arses in racing for my tastes. (There, I've said it!). But that most definitely does not mean it cannot be profitable. More and more Gold users are finding their way into profit, and enjoying the journey as well as the destination.

I hope there has been at least something in this outline that you can take away and try. Thanks a lot for reading, and good luck with your betting, however you arrive at your selections.

Matt

p.s. Geegeez Gold is an evolving computer form book, with beautifully presented data/feature-rich racecards, form tools, and a suite of reports. You've seen some components in this post, and if you'd like to try it for yourself, you have two options:

  1. If you haven't already, register a free account here. That will give you daily access to Races of the Day, which include ALL of the Gold features for those races. You'll also get a daily Feature of the Day - which might be a report, or a tool, or a tip. That register link is here.
  2. Or, if you'd like unrestricted access, sign up for a ONE MONTH trial for just £1, and have a play with everything we have to offer. After your month is up, you'll be billed £30 monthly, or £297 for a full year. Naturally, you can cancel at any time, and we'll even sort you out if you forget for any reason. We're good like that 😉

>>>Sign up for a 30 day trial of Gold here<<<

 

p.p.s. If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on twitter, facebook, Google+, or via email. Thanks a lot - the buttons are below.

p.p.p.s. If you have any thoughts, or comments, on this post, or on the handicapping process in general, do please leave a note below. I love hearing from you, and will be happy to clarify anything you're not sure about if I can.

The Value Consensus: Playing with the Favourite-Longshot Bias

Value betting is the most mainstream concept in the modern betting landscape, writes Tony Keenan. It has passed into the lexicon of gambling and there can hardly be a punter around that hasn’t heard of the idea. We’ve reached a point where Tom Segal, the public face of value betting, is on The Morning Line more often than Tony McCoy and it has even spawned parody comments like ‘value loser’ and ‘you can’t eat value.’

For most, value betting means one thing: big prices. While a value bet can theoretically be a 1/3 shot that should be 1/10, in the main such examples aren’t referenced and the typical comment about a favourite in much racing writing and programming can be summed up as ‘he’ll probably win but he’s a bit short.’ Rarely do we hear mention of the odds-on shot that should be even shorter.

But perhaps the pendulum has swung too far the other way and the runners that appear short, far from being priced lower than their real chance of winning, actually aren’t short enough. This favourite-longshot bias certainly seemed at play over the recent Cheltenham Festival with some of the Mullins hotpots but it’s not just that; the place markets on the exchanges for the Grand National on Saturday were wildly out of sync with the same place odds available in an each-way bet with the bookmakers, the favourites seemingly bigger than they should be and the outsiders representing the flip-side.

I think this applies far more in day-to-day racing now than it used to and we need to be aware that markets are fluid and don’t remain the same: it is important to zig when most people are zagging. And that can be a problem for an old-style value punter who is used to looking on shorties with scorn. In fact, many of these punters – and I include myself here – would have personal betting rules like ‘never bet odds-on’, tenets that might have served you well in the past but have become outdated. As we’ll see later, taking that approach to the current Irish national hunt season would have meant there were 311 odds-on shots (judging on BSP) that you refused to back; 195 of them have won so you were taking out a large chunk of possible betting opportunities.

In the tables that follow, I will look at the fortunes of odds-on shots, defined as having a Betfair Starting Price of 2.0 or shorter, in recent Irish jumps campaigns. Using Horse Race Base, I’ve put together the numbers to see if there are any patterns emerging. When I refer to actual over expected in the final column of the table, it is done to official starting price rather than the Betfair equivalent as this is the method used on Horse Race Base.

Let’s first look at the number of odds-on shots to run over jumps in Ireland in each season since 2008/9:

 

NH Season Bets Wins Strikerate Level Stakes Actual/Expected
2008/09 164 104 63.4% +3.16 1.02
2009/10 217 125 57.6% -16.23 0.93
2010/11 180 109 60.6% -3.89 0.97
2011/12 227 130 57.3% -21.69 0.91
2012/13 272 162 59.6% -19.37 0.92
2013/14 250 159 63.6% +1.36 1.00
2014/15 303 184 60.7% -18.06 0.95
2015/16 311 195 62.7% -10.00 0.97

 

The first thing that jumps out is the gradual rise in the number of odds-on shots; again, punters who are excluding themselves from betting in races with money-on pokes are ruling out a hell of a lot of races. We see that prior to last season, there was not a campaign with more than 272 odds-on shots but there were 303 last year and already we are at 311 in 2015/16 and there are three weeks of the season left. The other notable feature is that backing all these odds-on shots, though not profitable, has come close to breakeven point in each of the last three seasons judging by the actual over expected. Given that those figures are worked out from official SP suggests there is an edge here; Betfair SPs are typically bigger even allowing for commission while many of these winners will have been available at bigger prices before the off.

I suspect at least some of this edge is down to the attitude punters approach the market with, i.e. they want to oppose the fancied horses as they are perceived as too short. There are other reasons though. The concentration of talent in the Mullins yard has played a big part as has that trainer’s approach in that he tries to keep his horses apart as much as possible to maximise the number of races won, rather than run them in what might be seen as the most logical races. Racing has facilitated much of this with a greatly expanded programme book and I’d be in the camp that competitiveness has suffered because there is too much racing. Competitive racing, of course, produces much fewer odds-on shots.

Next, we have the record of odds-on favourites by month and instead of going back as far as 2008/9 here, I’ve worked from 2010/11 to the present day in the hope this will provide a better picture of the current state of the markets.

 

Month Bets Wins Strikerate Level Stakes Actual/Expected
January 174 107 61.5% -11.31 0.94
February 144 75 52.1% -30.36 0.80
March 126 71 56.4% -11.97 0.89
April 79 46 58.2% -5.97 0.92
May 115 72 62.6% +2.63 1.02
June 50 25 50.0% -8.06 0.82
July 83 55 66.3% +1.72 1.04
August 128 73 57.0% -9.21 0.92
September 67 50 74.6% +14.74 1.22
October 155 104 67.1% +6.37 1.05
November 206 129 62.6% -8.81 0.96
December 216 132 61.1% -11.42 0.95

 

Your first 30 days for just £1

The findings here are surprising. One might expect odds-on shots to do best in the traditional jumps season from November to April when Willie Mullins has his best horses running. In fact, the opposite is true as betting the odds-on over summer jumps is [much] more profitable with the exception of June. It may just be a quirk of sample size – there are fewer jumps races at this time of the year – but the pattern is still quite marked and it offers food for thought at least.

Different types of Irish national hunt race are also worth considering:

 

Race Type Bets Wins Strikerate Level Stakes Actual/Expected
Chase 413 261 63.2% -0.63 1.00
Hurdle 849 513 60.4% -54.64 0.94
Bumper 281 165 58.7% -16.38 0.95

 

Again, the results here are unusual. One might expect chases to be the least predictable of the three disciplines as fences bring in a great possibility of falling but the opposite is true as odds-on shots here do best and come very close to making a small profit off level-stakes.

Finally, the record of trainers with odds-on runners since 2010/11 and for the purposes of the table I’ve looked at those with at least 20 such qualifiers. The table is in alphabetical order.

 

Trainer Bets Wins Strikerate Level Stakes Actual/Expected
H. De Bromhead 56 39 69.6% +7.80 1.14
C. Byrnes 29 16 55.2% -2.90 0.89
G. Elliott 128 74 57.8% -10.76 0.91
J. Harrington 51 29 56.9% -3.97 0.92
T. Martin 38 20 52.6% -6.96 0.83
N. Meade 71 49 69.0% +5.31 1.06
M. Morris 20 10 50.0% -4.03 0.82
W. Mullins 640 403 63.0% -32.68 0.95
E. O’Grady 31 20 64.5% +0.83 1.04
D. Weld 36 23 63.9% -0.16 0.99

 

Willie Mullins has had just a staggering number of odds-on shots; in fact, in the period covered he has sent out 41.4% of the total odds-on favourites. Finding an edge with Mullins is difficult – though betting his shorties at the Cheltenham Festival makes sense – and I prefer to look at other trainers. Henry De Bromhead is one that stands out. He comes out best both on overall strikerate and actual over expected and the best spots to back his short-priced horses are in graded races and over fences and ideally a combination of both. Noel Meade also does well; his 69% return his hard on the heels of De Bromhead and, along with Edward O’Grady, they are the three trainers with actual over expecteds of greater than 1.00.

From a brief glance at the figures for the flat in Ireland, the rise in odds-on shots seems nothing like as marked but it is something I may return to over the summer. For now, be wary of opposing short-priced runners in Irish jumps races for the sake of it and, indeed, don’t be afraid to back some of them; though starting the project at Punchestown might be a little too brave as the meeting can produce some surprising end-of-season results.

- Tony Keenan

Follow Tony on twitter at @RacingTrends

A Nasty ST-D? Sticky and Not-So-Sticky Jockeys

A Nasty ST-D?

By Ricky Taylor

At the moment I am doing a lot of research into jockeys and looking to uncover new ways of assessing their relative abilities that go beyond the usual statistics on rides, winners and winning strike rate. The recent tribulations of poor Sam Twiston-Davies got me thinking about jump jockeys and whether or not you could find good statistics on the number of times that a jockey gets unseated. After all, in jump racing the ability of the jockey to actually stay on the horse over a jump is an important factor!

For those who are not familiar with the recent story, Sam Twiston-Davies got unseated twice in a couple of days in mid-December. This wouldn’t have been that remarkable but he got unseated on the flat rather than because the horse had made a mistake at a fence or hurdle. First he parted company with Politologue approaching the last in a hurdle race at Cheltenham, and then he hit the deck again when he fell off Hawkhurst on the run-in at Southwell a couple of days later when he had the race in the bag. He has since vowed to change his riding style and to his credit he apologised to losing punters for his error, although to be fair to him the horse didn’t help him at Southwell by jinking. These unfortunate incidents were all put down to technical issues with Sam’s riding style. I think this might be a bit harsh as the lad has ridden nearly 600 winners and had plenty of big race winners. However, it reminded me of my limited riding experience and how difficult it is to stay on a horse at a trot let alone at full blooded racing pace, jumping fences and hurdles! This got me thinking about whether there are any statistics on the number and proportion of rides where a jockey is unseated.

To my surprise I couldn’t find any stats on the subject of unseated rides from the usual sources such as the Racing Post website. There was plenty of data about wins and rides over hurdles and fences, prize money won and the number of place finishes, and even minimum riding weight over the last twelve months, but nothing on how good a jockey was at actually staying on his mount. Of course this is a good thing for those prepared to bother with compiling their own statistics because it is a little bit of information that isn’t readily available to other punters and layers and therefore might not be reflected in the horses’ odds, giving a bit of value to those with the extra bit of data.

Unseat vs Fall

The first thing to note is the definition of an ‘unseat’ and how it differs from a fall in the formbook. Professional race readers, who compile the official form book, determine whether a horse has fallen or if the jockey fell off.  A fall is basically where the jockey had no chance of staying on board because the horse physically hit the deck. An unseat is when the horse might have made a mistake jumping a fence but remained on its feet but the jockey was unable to remain in the saddle. In practice there is quite a wide range of unseats. There are plenty of occasions when the horse has made such an error that its head has hit the deck, and its backside has shot up into the air that no jockey, unless super glued to the saddle, is going to be able to keep the partnership intact. However, there are also plenty of occasions when you think that a jockey simply fell off when another jockey might have been able to stay in the saddle. The Sam Twiston-Davies incidents are rarer. I can’t think of too many incidents when a jockey has fallen off on the flat, although it does happen and is incredibly frustrating for punters when it does.

I’ve analysed the results of all jump races run in Great Britain and Ireland since 2013 to November 2015. For reasons of space, and to cut out the noise from small numbers, I restricted the results to jockeys that had more than 200 hundred rides over the period. I haven’t distinguished between hurdle and chase races to keep the sample as large as possible. The results are set out in the Table below. They make for interesting reading. The first thing to note is the all jockey average. The overall unseat rate of all jump jockeys is around 1.7 per cent or 1.7 unseats in every 100 rides (rank 70 in the Table). This provides the context and you ideally don’t want to see a jockey getting unseats higher than this average.

Sense Check

The next thing to do is to do a sense check on the results. Basically where do Ruby Walsh and Tony McCoy feature on the Table? These are the two acknowledged expert riders over the period. McCoy records an unseat rate, over a huge number of rides, of just 0.75 per cent. That is well below the average and ranks him towards the bottom of the Table. Walsh is also well below the average with an unseat rate of just 0.9 per cent. The current top jockey Richard Johnson also has an unseat rate that isn’t much higher than the rate for Walsh.

 

Your first 30 days for just £1

 

Jockey Unseated rate (%)  Number of rides Rank
Conor Shoemark 8.56%                              631 1
Sean Bowen 8.19%                              513 2
Andrew Tinkler 7.28%                              742 3
Samantha Drake 6.88%                              218 4
Mark Enright 6.00%                              900 5
Stephen Mulqueen 4.68%                              342 6
David Splaine 3.80%                              526 7
Jonathan Moore 3.44%                              262 8
Aidan Coleman 3.38%                           2,071 9
Kevin Jones 3.29%                              243 10
Barry Keniry 3.21%                              249 11
Lucy Alexander 3.19%                              564 12
Tom Messenger 3.13%                              256 13
Mark Quinlan 3.08%                              454 14
Ryan Hatch 3.03%                              462 15
Robert Jones 2.83%                              212 16
Joe Colliver 2.70%                              333 17
Ger Fox 2.69%                              557 18
Luke Dempsey 2.67%                              486 19
Adam O'Neill 2.66%                              263 20
Ben Dalton 2.65%                              528 21
Charlie Poste 2.63%                              571 22
James Banks 2.60%                              730 23
Mr John Dawson 2.60%                              231 24
Robert Dunne 2.57%                              623 25
Micheal Nolan 2.55%                              510 26
Lee Edwards 2.54%                              394 27
Tom Bellamy 2.52%                              357 28
Rachael Blackmore 2.50%                              200 29
Grant Cockburn 2.46%                              244 30
Alan Crowe 2.44%                              616 31
Paddy Kennedy 2.43%                              412 32
Alan Johns 2.34%                              214 33
Tommy Phelan 2.34%                              214 34
Brian Cawley 2.33%                              215 35
Liam Heard 2.33%                              258 36
Alain Cawley 2.30%                              392 37
Graham Watters 2.29%                              436 38
Shane Crimin 2.29%                              262 39
Dominic Elsworth 2.25%                              222 40
Joshua Moore 2.24%                              490 41
Tony Kelly 2.23%                              584 42
Trevor Whelan 2.22%                              720 43
Richie McLernon 2.21%                              906 44
John Kington 2.20%                              273 45
Peter Carberry 2.17%                              460 46
Thomas Garner 2.14%                              327 47
Diarmuid O'Regan 2.14%                              327 48
Liam Treadwell 2.14%                              889 49
James Best 2.13%                              800 50
Kielan Woods 2.12%                              566 51
Danny Cook 2.11%                              473 52
Harry Challoner 2.07%                              434 53
Joe Cornwall 2.04%                              343 54
Peter Buchanan 2.02%                              793 55
Craig Nichol 2.02%                              595 56
Callum Bewley 2.01%                              348 57
Thomas Cheesman 2.00%                              250 58
Robbie Moran 1.99%                              251 59
J J Burke 1.95%                              972 60
Daragh Bourke 1.95%                              205 61
Kevin Sexton 1.95%                              769 62
Ben Poste 1.92%                              469 63
Will Kennedy 1.88%                              906 64
Martin Burke 1.81%                              221 65
Nico de Boinville 1.79%                              616 66
Matt Griffiths 1.76%                              284 67
Wayne Hutchinson 1.74%                           1,090 68
D J Casey 1.73%                              751 69
All jockey average 1.73%                      140,189 70
Tom Cannon 1.72%                           1,165 71
Harry Bannister 1.70%                              235 72
Jamie Bargary 1.69%                              237 73
Brian Harding 1.66%                           1,026 74
Jonathan England 1.65%                              485 75
Paul Carberry 1.62%                              740 76
Callum Whillans 1.62%                              247 77
Hadden Frost 1.62%                              247 78
Jake Hodson 1.61%                              311 79
Maurice Linehan 1.60%                              250 80
Brian Hayes 1.60%                              752 81
A P Heskin 1.59%                           1,198 82
Ryan Treacy 1.57%                              255 83
Henry Brooke 1.55%                              901 84
Jake Greenall 1.54%                              585 85
Mark Grant 1.54%                              455 86
Keith Donoghue 1.53%                              391 87
Jody McGarvey 1.52%                              592 88
Shane Shortall 1.49%                              470 89
Ryan Mania 1.48%                              607 90
Daniel Hiskett 1.48%                              203 91
Richie McGrath 1.44%                              277 92
M P Fogarty 1.44%                              696 93
Adam Wedge 1.43%                              837 94
Conor Ring 1.42%                              351 95
Brendan Powell 1.42%                           1,338 96
Jamie Moore 1.42%                           1,270 97
Robert Thornton 1.39%                              360 98
Sam Twiston-Davies 1.39%                           2,380 99
Robert Williams 1.37%                              219 100
Michael Darcy 1.37%                              293 101
Davy Condon 1.35%                              668 102
Killian Moore 1.34%                              372 103
David Mullins 1.34%                              522 104
Jack Doyle 1.34%                              374 105
Marc Goldstein 1.30%                              460 106
Donal Devereux 1.30%                              384 107
Ryan Mahon 1.30%                              540 108
Jack Quinlan 1.28%                              545 109
Kieron Edgar 1.28%                              391 110
Patrick Mangan 1.26%                              477 111
M P Butler 1.25%                              399 112
Sean Quinlan 1.25%                              561 113
Andrew J McNamara 1.23%                              812 114
Brian O'Connell 1.21%                           1,073 115
Andrew Ring 1.21%                              579 116
Andrew Thornton 1.19%                              926 117
Dave Crosse 1.17%                              513 118
E O'Connell 1.17%                              343 119
Derek Fox 1.11%                              450 120
Wilson Renwick 1.08%                              930 121
Leighton Aspell 1.07%                           1,212 122
Bryan Cooper 1.07%                           1,122 123
Patrick Corbett 1.06%                              376 124
Dougie Costello 1.06%                           1,134 125
Denis O'Regan 1.05%                           1,143 126
Tom Scudamore 1.04%                           1,919 127
Paul Townend 1.04%                           1,156 128
Adrian Lane 1.02%                              294 129
James Davies 1.02%                              687 130
Sean McDermott 1.01%                              297 131
Martin Ferris 1.01%                              397 132
Conor Maxwell 1.01%                              397 133
Tom O'Brien 1.01%                           1,590 134
Ciaran Gethings 1.00%                              299 135
Shane Butler 0.97%                              309 136
Brian Hughes 0.97%                           1,857 137
Jack Kennedy 0.96%                              313 138
Ian Popham 0.95%                              631 139
Noel Fehily 0.93%                           1,821 140
Gavin Sheehan 0.93%                           1,075 141
Richard Johnson 0.93%                           2,806 142
Niall P Madden 0.92%                              649 143
Daryl Jacob 0.91%                           1,208 144
Roger Loughran 0.91%                              552 145
Conor O'Farrell 0.90%                              886 146
R Walsh 0.90%                           1,219 147
Joe Tizzard 0.87%                              230 148
Mark Bolger 0.85%                              470 149
Barry Geraghty 0.84%                           1,549 150
Jeremiah McGrath 0.81%                              369 151
Paddy Brennan 0.81%                           1,356 152
Adam Pogson 0.81%                              248 153
Michael Byrne 0.81%                              621 154
Phillip Enright 0.80%                           1,127 155
Mark Walsh 0.78%                           1,274 156
Jason Maguire 0.78%                           1,279 157
D G Hogan 0.78%                              512 158
John Cullen 0.78%                              512 159
David Bass 0.77%                              779 160
A P McCoy 0.75%                           2,133 161
Ian McCarthy 0.74%                              538 162
Adam Nicol 0.73%                              410 163
James Reveley 0.72%                              829 164
Mr D G Noonan 0.72%                              277 165
A E Lynch 0.69%                           1,880 166
Sean Flanagan 0.67%                              742 167
B M Cash 0.66%                              454 168
Danny Mullins 0.64%                              936 169
Nick Scholfield 0.64%                           1,410 170
Robbie Colgan 0.63%                              950 171
Paul Moloney 0.59%                           1,533 172
Robbie Power 0.50%                              800 173
Harry Derham 0.48%                              208 174
Harry Skelton 0.47%                              859 175
Rhys Flint 0.41%                              245 176
Davy Russell 0.36%                           1,105 177
Felix De Giles 0.22%                              457 178

 

Back to Sam

Where does poor old Sam Twiston-Davies feature? Well he actually does pretty well. He is well below the average unseat rate. He had about 1.39 unseats for every 100 rides. This is a fair bit higher than for Walsh, McCoy and Johnson but isn’t too bad in the grand scheme. He probably needs to improve this part of his game if he wants to be a top jockey, however. I also see that Davy Russell is near the bottom of the Table which fits my impression of him as a rider. He has proven very hard to unseat and a superb horseman. It may also be worth noting that Paul Moloney is well down the table and I think that he is an underrated jockey.

The table doesn’t make for good reading if you are one of the dozen jockeys at the top of the rankings. Conor Shoemark, Sean Bowen, Andrew Tinkler, Samantha Drake, Mark Enright, Stephen Mulqueen, David Splaine, Jonathan Moore, Aidan Coleman, Kevin Jones, Barry Keniry and Lucy Alexander all have exceptionally high unseat rates. I was amazed to see that Aidan Coleman records 3.4 unseats for every 100 rides, which is about twice the average unseat rate. Conor Shoemark seemed to find it hard to stay on a horse in the period in question…

Conclusion

I think this is interesting and potentially profitable data. It could be biased by the fact that some jockeys might be consistently riding poor quality animals that simply can’t jump, but over a large number of rides one would expect much of that bias to be cancelled out.  I’ll certainly be using the data to spot potential lay bets or to re-adjust my own betting forecasts. I hope you find it useful.

 

 

 

Gold Reports: What do the numbers really mean?

As of today, a subset of Gold reports now have two extra columns on them. In this post, I'll outline not just the two extra columns but the whole reporting structure and how best to use them.

Gold-en Reporting

There are currently eleven reports in the Gold suite - more will follow in 2016 - and each has its tell-tale pointers for the day's punting.

The first five in the banner above - called a mega menu apparently, and what you see when you hover on the 'Reports' link in the top navigation - all have individual layouts which I'll not go into here. That's for two reasons:

  1. Their layout hasn't changed from the format displayed in the User Guide (click to download)
  2. I don't want this post to be too long!

The remaining six, from Trainer Statistics top right and all the way through the bottom row, all follow a common format, as follows [click to enlarge] :

Geegeez Gold Trainer Statistics Report

Geegeez Gold Trainer Statistics Report

Allow me to share the layout. The report is split into two areas: the 'control' at the top and the 'content' beneath.

The Report Controls

In the top section, users can define how and what they want to see. For instance, if you like to lay horses, you might change the win percentage filter to be from 'Any' to '10%', and look for fancied runners representing trainers with poor form in the context of the relevant period.

The "relevant period" is whichever blue button on the right that is checked - displaying in a lighter colour. In this example, it is Course 5 Year Form.

The other two blue buttons, to the left, allow Gold users to look at either today's racing or, for you evening students, the following day's action.

Oh, and if you're mainly interested in handicap races, you can select the 'HCAP' filter at the top, to show the report output for handicap races only - pretty neat when trying to sift the "always trying" from the "occasionally tuned up to do a job"!

The Meat of the Matter

Once you've set your parameters, click the big grey 'UPDATE' button and the content area will display those entities - trainers in this case - that fit your criteria. On subsequent visits to the report, your settings will be recalled, so if you have a fixed approach you need only set this once. (You're welcome!)

The content area is split into four parts: qualifying entities, record, profit/loss, and statistical significance. It is the last part which is new, but let me quickly touch on each to set the scene.

The example above has been set to display trainers whose course record in the last five years includes at least 20 runners. All other filter parameters have been set to 'Any'. I have then clicked the column heading by which I want to sort: the default is number of wins, and I have changed it to Win %.

We can see at the top of the content area that the picks of the trainers with runners today on this configuration are Nicky Henderson at Doncaster and Warren Greatrex at Bangor.

Looking to the race record next, both have struck at better than one-in-three under these conditions, and both have a better than 50% place record - which might be of interest to placepot players, as well as exacta/trifecta protagonists.

Of course, we need to consider win/place strike rates in the context of profitability (or 'lossability' if you're a layer), which is where the third set of columns come in. As well as win profit and loss we also calculate each way performance, and that data is displayed to the right of the performance record. Here, we can see that both Hendo and 'the great Rex' have rewarded support - both win and each way - historically in this context, as we might expect having sorted on win percentage.

Clicking on any row in the report will reveal inline information relating to that report row's entries. In the example above, Greatrex has two runners at Bangor, Ballyculla and Ma Du Fou. Clicking on a row in the inline display will open a new window for that race. (The aim is to make these reports both useful and usable!)

A Measure of Utility

And so to the 'new stuff'. The final two columns, on the far right, are A/E and IV. These are measures of statistical significance where a score of 1.00 is the norm (i.e. neither significant nor insignificant). The job of A/E is subtly different from that of IV.

Actual vs Expected (A/E)

A/E, or the ratio of Actual versus Expected, attempts to establish the value proposition (profitability in simple terms) of a statistic. The 'actual' and 'expected' are the number of winners.

Eh? Expected number of winners? What's them then? Let me try to explain.

So we're happy the actual number of winners is just that. In the case of Nicky Henderson above, he has had 40 winners from 113 runners. Actual then is 40.

But how do we calculated the 'expected' number of winners? We use a simple formula based on the starting price (you could just as easily use Betfair Starting Price or even tote return if you were sufficiently minded - we've used SP), thus:

Actual number of winners / Sum of ALL [entity] runners' SP's (in percentage terms)

which we know at this stage to be 40/ Sum of ALL [entity] runners' SP's (in percentage terms)

To establish a runner's SP in percentage terms, we do the sum 1/(SP + 1).

For instance, 4/1 SP would be 1/(4 + 1), or 1/5, which is 0.20.

1/4 SP would be 1/(0.25 + 1), or 1/1.25, which is 0.8.

And so on...

Your first 30 days for just £1

The sum of Henderson's 113 runners' starting prices in the last five years, calculated in the above fashion, is 32.078.

Our A/E then is 40 / 32.078 which is 1.247, or 1.25 for cash.

We can then say that Hendo's Donny horses have performed 25% above market expectation in the last five years. Based on a reasonable sample size of 113 runners (all sample sizes for these reports are unacceptably small for categorical pronouncements, but in many cases are perfectly sufficient for wagering chances to be taken), we can say that in general terms his horses look worth following.

***********

Important Note!

Before I go on, I want to make it plain that you absolutely do NOT need to understand how the numbers are arrived at. I am adding this info for geeks and the generally inquisitive.

What you need to know is that better than 1.00 is good, and worse than 1.00 is not good (for backers); and that the further away from 1.00 the better/worse the stat may be.

***********

Impact Value

But wait. What if a sample has been skewed by a 66/1 winner? Or two big-priced horses? The A/E figure might look very attractive, but what are the chances of such an event repeating itself?

Good question, and I'm glad you asked! 😉

We use Impact Value to help reveal skewed datasets. Impact Value is essentially a glorified winners/runners ratio, except that it looks at things in the context of the micro (e.g. Nicky Henderson's 5 year record at Doncaster) versus the macro (e.g. all races at Doncaster in the last five years).

Here's how it goes...

IV = %age of Donny 5 year winners trained by N Henderson / %age of Donny 5 year runners trained by N Henderson

To work out the first bit, we need to know how many winners Hendo trained, and how many winners there were at Donny in the last five years overall. We already know Hendo trained 40 winners in that time, but what we didn't hitherto ken is that there were 1177 winners ridden at Doncaster (flat and jumps).

So, our "%age of Donny 5 year winners trained by N Henderson" is 40 / 1177 = .033985 (expressed as a decimal)

For the second bit, we already know that Henderson ran 113 horses at Doncaster in the period, and I can reveal that there were 12146 total runners in that time.

"%age of Donny 5 year runners trained by N Henderson" is then 113 / 12146 = .009303 (expressed as a decimal)

Impact Value therefore is 0.033985 / 0.009303 = 3.652905, or 3.65 to two decimal places.

T'riffic, Matt, but what does it all mean?

It means that, at Doncaster in the last five years, a horse trained by Nicky Henderson is more than three-and-a-half times more likely to win than the norm.

The Perfect Combination

For backers, then, the ideal world is a reasonable dataset - in this context, more than 50 is fair, more than 100 is good - and both A/E and IV showing some way above 1.00.

For layers, the same principle applies regarding sample size but, of course, you'd be looking for A/E and IV figures as far south of 1.00 as possible (and, naturally, prices you'd be comfortable laying at!).

An example, which Sod's Law dictates will now win, is Chantara Rose. Her trainer, Peter Bowen, has a five year record at Doncaster of 0 from 34. This gives scores of 0.00 twice, so one needs to look at the place record too. He's had just six of those 34 make the frame. In that light, Chantara Rose may have her work cut out and can be laid at 7.8.

Important Final Note

It is really, really, really important to note that the report output is best used as a starting point for your deliberations. Moreover, any horse can win any race, so - obviously - wagering on the basis of report output, or indeed on any basis, should be undertaken as part of a long game with a bank that supports and, where necessary, sustains it.

I know you know this, but I just want to be clear that good data allied to good punting sense is the way forward. Geegeez readers generally, and Gold users in particular, tend to 'get' this more than most punters... which sets us up rather nicely to profit from the sport we love.

Me and all of the team here at Geegeez very much hope this information will enhance the value of the 'bare stats' on the reports, and perhaps enable you to see more (or, just as importantly sometimes, less) value in the content of those data lists.

Matt

p.s. if you've any questions, just pop a comment below and I'll get back to you.