In this article, I will look at how the Tote Placepot panned out on a randomly chosen day this year and what led me to research it, writes Dave Renham. I have chosen May 1st, not for any other reason than it was the first of the month and was not too long ago. I wanted to select the day randomly rather than trawling through some results and focusing on a day when there was a considerable placepot dividend or two. Punters who regularly attempt the Placepot know there are plenty of meetings with low dividends, but the fact that some huge payouts do occur makes it a bet worth considering. In fact, the average payout for the Placepot is usually between £400 to £500 in any given year.

As most readers will know, the Placepot is a bet you can place at any race meeting, and it works by choosing a selection or selections in the first six races on the card of the relevant meeting. The aim is to have a selected horse or horses to finish in the placings in each of the six races. It is important to appreciate that the number of placings per race depends on the number of race runners and, in some cases, whether it is a handicap or a non-handicap. The finishing positions that constitute a place in any race in the Placepot are as follows:

2 to 4 runners – 1st

5 to 7 runners – 1st and 2nd

8 to 15 runners – 1st, 2nd and 3rd

Non-handicap 16 or more runners – 1st, 2nd and 3rd

Handicap 16 or more runners – 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th

If a selection becomes a non-runner, your choice in that race moves to the favourite. You can choose ‘favourite’ in your selection process rather than a specific horse if you’d like – that is an option. It is also worth sharing that if you are on the favourite and there are joint- or co-favourites, the one with the lowest racecard number becomes your selection.

Selecting just one horse in each of the six races will create one betting line. You can, of course, choose more than one horse in a race if you wish to spread the risk, which will increase the number of betting lines. Most seasoned Placepot punters mix up the number of selections for each race to widen the net, as it were.

For those using permutations, calculating the outlay (cost) of your Placepot bet is relatively straightforward. Ultimately, you need to know how many selections you have in each race to determine your betting lines. To do this, multiply those six figures together. Hence, if you chose two horses in three races and one horse for the other three races, you will create 8 betting lines (see below).

2 x 2 x 2 x 1 x 1 x 1 = 8 lines

The cost of the bet will depend on your unit stake – if your unit stake is £1, then the cost will be £8:

8 lines x £1.00 unit stake = £8.00 total stake

You can adjust the unit stake to suit. For example, you may want to use a unit stake of 25p instead, which means the overall cost of the bet would be £2.00 (8 x 25p).

Placepot dividends are paid to a £1 stake. Hence, if the Placepot dividend is, say, £100, and you have one winning line with a unit stake of 25p, your dividend would be a quarter of £100 because you are using a quarter of a £1 stake. Your payout in this scenario would be £25 (£100 divided by 4).

For any Placepot player, though, you need to be aware of the excellent Tix software, a staking optimisation tool built by Matt and Nigel Dove. The Tix software gives far more scope for perming your selections using different stakes, should you wish. Find out more about Tix here.

The upside of the Tote Placepot is that it is a ‘pool’ bet, which means you are essentially pitting your wits against other people rather than the bookmakers. Also, a fair number of Placepot bets per day are struck at the racecourse by racegoers who are simply having a fun bet whilst on a day out. Therefore, I feel I should have a significant edge regarding my betting ‘opponents’.

However, before getting too carried away, the bet has a downside: the Tote takes out 27% of the money put into the Placepot betting pot. Hence, if £100,000 is bet on a specific Placepot, only £73,000 of this is available to win. It is essentially like a Bookmaker’s overround where they build in their profit margin.

OK, with that explainer done, let me share the Tote Placepot data for the five UK meetings that raced on May 1st:

Overall, the day was not the most productive one for Placepot players with three meagre payouts. The payouts are calculated by dividing the Adjusted Final Pool Size by the remaining winning units. Hence, the Ascot dividend of £139.90 comes from £85,632.55 divided by 612.02.

I want to analyse one of these Placepot meetings in detail—the biggest one on the day at Ascot.

Race 1 – 1.10

This was a six-runner Class 2 conditions race for 2yos. Hence, two Placepot places were up for grabs (1st and 2nd). Below shows how many units went on each horse, what percentage of the pool that was, the Starting Price of each runner, and their Finishing Position.

The horses in red were the two Placepot ‘placers’. Interestingly, the most ‘pooled’ money was not on the favourite, Diligently; it was on the second favourite, Rock Hunter. Because of this, slightly more of the pot remained than one might have expected. Hence, £45,939.17 was left in the Placepot pool as we entered race 2. This equated to around 39% of the Adjusted Final Pool.

Looking at the % splits for each horse, we can also see that Sex on Fire had more than double the amount of money placed on him than Atherstone Warrior (11.1% of the pool versus 5.33%) despite their prices being virtually the same at 17/2 and 9/1. I do not have a bulletproof reason why this might have been the case, as you would expect the amounts on each horse to be closer to each other. However, data on any 2yo race is limited at this time of the year. In this particular contest, you had two debutants, three horses having their second career start, and one having their third. Hence, even the most seasoned punter finds getting a confident handle on this race more difficult. That is probably part of why there was such a discrepancy between the two horses. I am guessing there was a jockey factor in play, too, as Hoyle Doyle was riding Sex on Fire. She is a famous jockey, and I suspect some occasional Placepot punters would have seen her name and simply based their judgment on that. Another could be how their prices fluctuated during the day, but more of that discussion later.

Race 2 – 1.40

This was a Listed race with only five runners, so again, there would be two ‘placers’ counting. Here are the splits:

Again, the SPs do not quite match up with the % of pool figures. The second favourite, Docklands, had the most pool units, 3% more than the actual favourite. Likewise, there were two horses at 4/1, and there was a 6% difference between the two, equating to around 2700 units.

This was the second race in which the favourite had failed to place. Generally, better dividends occur when favourites have a poor day in terms of placing. Hopefully, this makes perfect sense, as favourites will be popular with Placepot pickers.

Race 3 – 2.15

This was another five-runner affair; this time, a Group 3 contest. Let me share the data for this one:

This time, the favourite comfortably had the most units staked on him, but again, the market leader failed to place. With the 11/1 outsider coming second and having a meagre 1.55% of the pooled money (354.82 units), this result increased the chances of a big payout. 78% of the staked units before this race were lost, leaving a pot of £5255.03.

Race 4 – 2.50

A 10-runner Group 3 sprint over 6f was the next action on the day, and a more extensive field of 10 runners went to post. Three to count this time, and here are the figures:

This race was not helpful in terms of a chance of being a very big Placepot payday. The two horses with comfortably the most units staked finished second and third. The 28/1 outsider Jakaiaro finished a neck away in 4th. If that had reversed placings with the third, it would have caused a serious dent in the remaining ‘pot’ and increased the chances significantly of a big payout. So, there was just under £3100 left in the pot with two races to go.

Race 5 – 3.25

An eight-runner sprint handicap was the penultimate Placepot race at Ascot that day. Here is how the remaining units were split between the runners:

The favourite placed for the second race running and, despite being 7/2, had over 37% of the remaining betting units. This could have been nearer 20-25% of the remaining units based on the actual SP, which again would have increased the final dividend considerably. Based on the upcoming Race 6 results, if the favourite Woolhampton had secured 25% of the remaining Race 5 units rather than 37.48%, the final dividend would have increased by around 22%. That’s significant. However, it highlights that we are dealing with unit sizes for individual runners that can fluctuate perhaps more than one would expect, given the so-called ‘true’ chance of the horse placing based on the SP.

Race 6 – 4.00

The second division of the handicap sprint was the final race as far as the Placepot was concerned. Again, we saw eight runners go to post. There were 2078.18 units remaining before the race:

The favourite failed, and the two horses with the most units (top two in the market) could not place. 29.45% of the units of the remaining units survived, leaving £612.02 left in the pot from the initial £85,632.55. The Placepot payout was a reasonable, if not huge, £139.90 to a £1 stake.

Being basically a ‘numbers man’, it is interesting for me to scrutinise each of these six races in some depth. What struck me was the correlation between the individual horses’ SPs and the units staked on these horses. It certainly was not always a positive correlation in line with expectations.

I decided to graph some Ascot data by looking at the individual horses’ SPs and the % of Placepot pool units staked on these horses. It shows all horses with SPs of 6.0 decimal odds (5/1) or shorter:

The graph does slope from the top left to the bottom right, but it is far from smooth and has plenty of outliers/anomalies.

Here is a tabular format with the exact %s (to 1 dp) for the number crunchers out there. I have highlighted in red what I perceive to be the main outliers:

As you can see at the top of the table, we have three different horses priced up at 3.0 (2/1), but one has 38.8% of the money in the pool, and the other two are much lower at 28% and 26.2%. Arguably, there is an even more significant differential when we look at the three 6.0 (5/1) runners with pool %s ranging from 5.4% to 18%.

You will get fluctuations when analysing price versus pool %, but I must admit, I was initially surprised when I looked at these Ascot results. Of course, the data is limited to just six races, but even so, I did expand my digging to the other four meetings that day and found that of all the horses priced 2/1, the lowest pool % for one horse (Cajetan) stood at 22.3%, and the highest was 38.8% (Sweet William) at Ascot. Then, I looked at some bigger price brackets than I did for Ascot and found that two horses priced 6/1 (7.0) were poles apart when it came to their pool %s – one had 20% of the units in the pool, the other just 7.4%.

Now, it should be stated that prices of horses often change from the early odds to their final SPs, so I surmised that this must be a significant contributory factor in this wide pool % of variances we have seen from such limited data. Hence, I continued to do some more digging. I looked at the two 2/1 SP shots I mentioned in the above paragraph (Cajetan and Sweet William) to see their Early Odds (e.g., their odds in the morning). Lo and behold, the 38.8% pool horse Sweet William was 15/8, a notch under the 2/1 SP, and the 22.3% pool horse Cajetan was a much bigger price ‘early doors’ at 9/2. In this comparison, therefore, it seems likely the early odds were the main reason behind the Placepot pool % variance. So, it got me thinking... obviously!

I thought it might be worthwhile to check out some horses whose prices remained the same during the day. I decided to check out some horses with early odds of 2/1 and, also a final Starting Price of 2/1. I expect these runners should be with a few percent of each other in terms of pool percentages. This type of research must be done slowly, race by race, so I have only looked at the last 30 qualifiers (at the time of writing). That should give us a fairly good overview. Here is what I found:

As you can see, we still have some significant variances. The highest figure was 47.3%, more than double the lowest figure of 22.1%. OK, they were the ‘extremes’, but even if you ignore, let’s say, the highest and lowest three figures, there is still a difference of over 10% from highest to lowest (39.4% versus 29.1%). The average figure for all 30 horses is 33.8%, which is what I would have expected.

So, what does that tell us? Clearly, fluctuations in ‘expected’ pool %s will occur regularly. Is it possible to pinpoint patterns and predict likely pool %s for some horses? That is the 64-million-dollar question. My guess is that the make-up of all the prices within each race plays a key role, not just the individual prices themselves. I am sure there are other factors, and I have some ideas, but that is for another time (and a huge chunk of research).

Of course, some punters may argue that the important thing from their perspective is that they get at least one horse placed in each race and have a slice of the Placepot dividend. That is a fair point, but I’m guessing you would rather win one pot in ten if the dividend is, say, £5000, compared with winning five pots in ten, all paying under £20. We could all win more ‘pots’ if we stacked our selections with all horses from the top end of the betting. However, any such ‘wins’ will produce low dividends and give you no chance of securing a long-term profit. In fact, you will be haemorrhaging money! You need a better strategy than that to win big at the Placepot!

**

Summary

It's time to wind up this first foray into the Tote Placepot. I appreciate that I have inadvertently created more questions than answers. Still, I hope you might now have an increased appreciation of the Placepot and how much there is to the whole conundrum. For me, it’s time to do some more research into this Tote pool bet, and I will share that with you next time.

-DR