blonde poker forum

Rather than continue the ridiculous argument on why we shouldn't be betting at Cheltenham on TfT, I am going to put the maths in a new thread where it is less disruptive.

The Champion Hurdle had 8 runners.  Of those 3 looked no hopers, so effectively there were 5 horses battling for 3 places.

Of those 5, on the bettingf you could say:
Faugheen had an 85% chance of hitting the first 3;
Jezki had a 60% chance of hitting the top 3
The New One had a 65% chance of hitting the top 3.
Hurricane Fly had a 40% chance of hitting the top 3
Arctic Fire had a 22% chance of hitting the top 3
and the rest had maybe 28% between them.

quick check 85+60+65+40+20+30 = 300 so we are in business.

Those percentages were roughly in line with the place betting on betfair, give or take 5% on each.

Because the bookies were very competitve in this race and all the offers flying about you could back the whole lot to a win percentage of very close to 100%, maybe even less.

So you could back The New One at 9/2, Jezki at 6/1, Hurricane Fly at 11/1 and Artic Fire at 22/1.  I think those prices were all mentioned in the thread on Tuesday.  Given the closeness of the win book to 100%, it is safe to assume those win prices were about right.  Hence you were losing close to nothing in the long run on those win prices.

So what price were the bookies giving you on the place and what should they have been offering at true odds.

The New One was available at 9/8, when they should have been 1/2
Jezki was 6/4 when they should have been 4/6
Hurricane Fly was 11/4 when they should have been 6/4
and
Arctic Fire was 11/2 when they should have been 7/2

Given Faugheen was fairly freely available at better than its Betfair price, it really was golden.  So when I said we should be backing all 5, we really should have been.

So please can we quit this "Cheltenham is difficult" talk, Cheltenham is just great if you pick the right races to bet on. 

Cheers

Doobs

But I bet on the new one & lost so this can't be right?

pls read the title  ;nana;

The trouble with this attitude to betting is that most of us are actual punters so investing £100 with an upside of it returning £110 or a downside of getting £90 back isn't really that attractive although it obviously makes excellent sense in the long term.

But I lost

I think that is the point Ralph.

There are a lot of places in the World you can go and punt and there is no harm in it.  But if you want to win in the long run, you need to start thinking how to do it.  

There was a comment earlier about what was the point of putting up the short priced winners.  On Tuesday because I had backed the favourites at offer prices and done some hills mobile bets I got to the Champion Hurdle about even rather than a couple of hundred down.  There is a huge difference between the two on your mood as well as your bank balance.  I pretty much never miss something low variance and +EV when I see it.  I still back the bigger priced each way shots too, and I am sure they feel the same when they win whether I backed the favourite on an offer or not.  It all just evens out the peaks and troughs.  

So do you actually watch lots of races throughout the season and have studied opinions on horses' form/going/trainers/courses because you love NH racing or do you simply study markets/trends/statistics and look for mathematical advantages?

I get the idea about taking advantage of all of these bookies' offers, but how about that good feeling when you have backed one ante-post at a huge price and it turns up on the day at a way shorter price?

Personally I far prefer that feeling compared to betting on five horses EW in an 8-horse race because the maths say it's correct.

I understand your logic David but it's not for everyone.

doobs, did you back all 5 btw?

Doobs is talking about the difference between one punter trying to make a long term profit through a good solid strategy and your way of backing a ante-post horse and gaining a buzz from picking a winner months before the race, recreational punting.  Both are fine as it is all on what the individual wants to gain from  gambling. 

@Doobs, any specialised sport you like to trade/bet?

It just happened that this year I didn't really have a long term bet on the Champion and the only one that looked a bit big to me was probably Hurricane Fly.

I do both things.  I don't think one thing dilutes the other.  I was chuffed I made a profit on the Champion and probably more chuffed when Aux Ptits Sours came in.  But there isn't much more satisfying than just grinding a profit both days.

Yes, I said I was going to on Monday night.  You simply don't get an opportunity like that very often, and normally I feel much stronger about one or two of the horses.

To answer your other question, specials is my speciality and you'd probably struggle to find something less stats based. 

Good stuff, I do like the specials markets.  I hate stats, stats just complicate things. :)

Cheers Doobs, I've enjoyed reading your stuff throughout Cheltenham.

The key flaw in this strategy is Kitten Rock was not a no hoper.

And did you have a crystal ball that informed you Jezki was going to drift to 6/1?

Virtually every judge I speak to made it a solid 4/1, 9/2 chance over the weekend (Neil made it a very strong bet on Betting Emporium at 5/1, so he clearly did not envisage a drift)

The drift surprised everyone and you certainly couldn't get 6/1 Jezki at the same time you could get 6/4 or 11/8 Faugheen.

If you knew these moves were going to happen, it would have been far easier and more profitable to split your tank into trading the two horses IMO.

You rarely get a no hoper in a high class race,unless a pace setter has been put in.

I think 95% of people wouldn't have Jezki out of the first 3.

You are more likely to get a "no hoper" in a high class race

This thread still not showing "maths", still the very old "maths shows it's correct, but no calculations"

Yes but in this race you probably had one no-hoper

If you look back on TfT, I said that you "can probably back the top 5 and get value" on them all on Monday night.  It all got lost in a stupid spat about whether backing Faugheen each way was value, which was followed by such gems as the champion hurdle was a bad each way race and that cheltenham was a bad place to be betting.  That is why this thread exists.

I didn't have a crystal ball, but of the 5, I said I thought Jezki was getting "a bit short" at 9/2, and wouldn't have backed it at that price (I had already backed it anyway when Neil first mentioned it FWIW).  Saying the drift surprised everone just isn't correct.  I'd still say it would have been a bit of value as 9/8 is bigger than 4/6, even if I thought the win price was short.  Tighty got it at 5/1 and 6/1 for TfT as I recall.  I took some more at 6/1 FWIW

The New One was available on Tuesday morning at 5/1, which I took and pointed it out on the thread.  I took 4/1 the night before too, which averages close to 9/2. 

I backed Artic Fire at 20/1 e/w and pointed it out on the thread and I also pointed out Hurricane Fly was 11/1 on the thread and took it. 

None of this needed a crystal ball, it was just what happened.  You can check TfT and my previous posts if you think none of this happened.

Arguing whether you could get exactly the prices quoted is just arguing about whether you could get great value or exceptional value on the race.  I did honestly think I had backed Artic Fire at 22/1 and not 20/1 when I started this thread, but 5/1>>7/2 at the end of the day.  Likewise if you took Hurricane Fly at 9/1 rather than 11/1, 9/4>>6/4 and so on.

If I'd wanted to aftertime a race, Id pick one where the each way horses won.

And if you look back at my calcs I didn't rate Kitten Rock as no chance to finish in the top 3, but did give it a smaller percentage than Artic Fire.

Finally Aaron, there were a couple of maths steps missing eg I didn't say 40% and 6/4 were equivalent and I didn't say quarter of 11/1 was 11/4, but the calciulations are definitely there.