Tips for Tikay

[horseplayer]

re horse racing

I said this before but 55 bets is still completely irrelevant as a sample

I no that all of my selections for this thread have started below the price suggested apart from two. This tells me i have spotted value as the market at the off of a horse race is a lot more accurate these days.

Infact three of them have traded at 1.20 or shorter (1-5 on) in running without winning.

I am getting confused again i thought the purpose of the thread was to provide tips on sporting events for tikay not how to arb, how to trade or how to squeeze a few quid through promotions.

Yes, 100% on board as to sample size.

I think I'm sailing my own little ship here, but I think it is good practice to self examine, & do so repeatedly. That's all I'm doing.

Your tips always start at a lower price then when recommended. We just need that variance thing to kick in, I think.

appreciate i have bleated enough on this thread previously

since jan i have had approx 200 horse racing bets, 168 of these have beaten the betfair sp by more than two points.

I am losing fairly heavily for the year same thing happened five years ago, if i wasnt beating the sp i would be more worried even so i analyse every bet some i am still happy with some i am not.

The majority of my bets are in the 6-1 to 20-1 + bracket so when you factor that in to things losing runs are part of the job im afraid.

[AceHighSuited]

I think sample size is important and should never be underrated.

I don't know that I subscribe to the idea that beating the SP is value either.  On the face of it, that would be a valid argument, but the variables involved in horse racing mean that us beating SP isn't always a deciding factor. 

As long as we are happy that we got on at the correct price then that is what matters to me.  I'm obviously disappointed if I bet something and it drifts.  Drifts can be alarming, but they can be accredited to different factors in the market.  There are certain stables I would never want to be with when a horse drifts but would always want to be with if the money comes flooding in.   

Regarding the horse bets as a whole, I think much of it depends what bets are placed.  Personally I have but up a few on this thread.  I think 4 selections and advised 4 in a lucky 15.  All have lost but one of those advised was a 40/1 2nd in a big handicap were a 1/4 of the odds applied so if on that occasion that bet had been placed that would have helped the figures.  I appreciate, and so should every other follower of this thread that not all bets can and will be placed. 

I would be confident that I could put you onto a few winners regularly by picking short priced fav's and second bests but I am not sure we would have value on our side in these events and although we may have a win now and again I would think in the long term that would hurt us more.  That may seem like it contradicts my earlier point but I don't see it like that. 

I think Simon and Ed between them have got it correct. 

This has to be a long term game and as has been shown a profit can be made. 

One point I would pick up on over the whole thread is bet sizing.  Some people put up selections but don't seem able to suggest spending anymore than £20.  That in itself could be a problem to the overall book.  Our bet sizes have to be consistent.  Where possible the size of a bet should be determined by how strongly we support it. 

[The Camel]

I think the key thing to look at with horse racing bets is comparing the price you have taken, with the closing price on betfair.

If you are beating that >50% you will be winning in the long run.

Actual results are just variance.

[redarmi]

Great post above from Ed.  

Sample of 55 is basically worthless in horseracing.  A bit of maths to give you an example if you are betting true 9/1 shots at 10-1 then over 55 bets you are 52% to have bet 5 or less winners that you would need to break even so even with the +EV most professionals would be losing over that sample size if they were betting true 9-1 shots or bigger.  Of course that isn't to say that Fred is a winner betting horses but I tend to agree with Ed that of all the sports offered on a daily basis racing is the easiest to beat.  It is ridiculously difficult to price up a horserace as a bookmaker and during the summer they have to price up maybe 50+ races a day which can be 500+ runners a day.  It is just very, very hard and we have some very knowledgeable racing punters here.  If anything I think we should be betting more racing although it is the one sport that screws up accounts more than any other but at a minimum we should be having a bet in every 16 and 17 runner handicap and making more use of lucky 15s etc.  I know you don't like them instinctively but if this thread is any then it is about setting aside prejudices and illogical thinking in favour of a winning mentality and methods.

On another note if Newcastle are true 1/2 shots then at 4-6 you should have £90 on current bankroll according to my calcs.

[The Camel]

Great post above from Ed.  

Sample of 55 is basically worthless in horseracing.  A bit of maths to give you an example if you are betting true 9/1 shots at 10-1 then over 55 bets you are 52% to have bet 5 or less winners that you would need to break even so even with the +EV most professionals would be losing over that sample size if they were betting true 9-1 shots or bigger.  Of course that isn't to say that Fred is a winner betting horses but I tend to agree with Ed that of all the sports offered on a daily basis racing is the easiest to beat.  It is ridiculously difficult to price up a horserace as a bookmaker and during the summer they have to price up maybe 50+ races a day which can be 500+ runners a day.  It is just very, very hard and we have some very knowledgeable racing punters here.  If anything I think we should be betting more racing although it is the one sport that screws up accounts more than any other but at a minimum we should be having a bet in every 16 and 17 runner handicap and making more use of lucky 15s etc.  I know you don't like them instinctively but if this thread is any then it is about setting aside prejudices and illogical thinking in favour of a winning mentality and methods.

On another note if Newcastle are true 1/2 shots then at 4-6 you should have £90 on current bankroll according to my calcs.

Didn't read Ed's post before dashing mine off.

Would have saved my overworked digits.

Great post.

[redarmi]

I'm always sceptacle about posting tips itt as I seem to be cursed, but...

Lille v FC Copenhagen 5/1 DNB everywhere or 8/1 outright on betvictor has to be value??

Unless someone can tell me what I am missing?

Copenhagen massively in form haven't been beaten in their last 10 matches, Lille have come off the boil and are W2 L2 DR2 for their last 6. First leg Copenhagen beat Lille 1-0!!

Lille have lost Eden Hazard and Joe Cole which has had a massive impact. This is an important game for Lille, but just because they have to win doesn't mean they will.

DNB worth £20 in my eyes. Would be interseted to see what the shrewdies say.

Don't really have a view on this but if you want to consider it then the 8/1 outright is much better than 5-1 dnb.  Market likes Lille though so you might get better.

[millidonk]

Cheers Red, thought I had been lost in the nags discussions.. Market does seem to like Lille a lot but looking at the actual figures i'm not so sure. Apart from reading "this is a must win game for Lille" I can't see any reason not to think Copenhagen are value at 8-1. Holding out for a bit just to see if I can get better but will certainly be putting my money where my mouth is on this one.

[tikay]

Some terrific replies to the Horse Racing thing, thanks, that was EXACTLY what I was looking for. I'll reply properly later, things to do right now.

[tikay]

And this was ALSO precisely what I ws anglng for, as to Fraser's bet, this is by redarmi......

On another note if Newcastle are true 1/2 shots then at 4-6 you should have £90 on current bankroll according to my calcs.

Our position (at 4/6) is already reserved, & £90 it will be.

Details later.

[Jamier-Host]

And in case anyone wants to get defensive, don’t. It’s good practice, imo, in gambling, as in business, where I did this all the time, to concentrate on what is losing money, & leave profitable stuff to look after itself. 

I'd be careful with this philosophy - sounds a bit like the poker player knowing it's all skill when he's winning but looking for excuses when losing! 

I have an awesome example from the business world that would take too long to explain properly - but basically a product was flying and the company rushed to expand internationally without really understanding WHY it was flying.  Turns out it wasn't the awesome product or superstar salesmen after all - it was a weird UK government quirk that meant the buyers were effectively getting a freeroll on their investment due to a rebate/subsidy.  Said product ended up bombing abroad as actually had no edge over competitors.

Should make sure the profitable stuff is that way for good reason, rather than just running good.

[tikay]

Last two races @ Kempton tomorrow, Paddy Wankers have overpriced the jolly in each race imo.

Mizwaaj @ 11/4 and Storm King 7/2.

Gonna suggest a filthy £25 each-way double @ those prices.

Thanks Mr Fifteen to One.

We would have done these as two singles, £25 each, but with the sheer volume of Fred activity yesterday, I missed them, sorry.

Current prices - proving your case - are 6/4 & 3/1, so too late now, I would suggest?

Which also neatly proves today's discussion points on horse racing & prices, too.

One result of today's debate is that we MAY be doing more horse racing bets soon, so dont be doing your trademark flounce on me, or I'll grass you up to Car Park Henderson, who, it seems to me, owns you in these exchanges.

[tikay]

And in case anyone wants to get defensive, don’t. It’s good practice, imo, in gambling, as in business, where I did this all the time, to concentrate on what is losing money, & leave profitable stuff to look after itself. 

I'd be careful with this philosophy - sounds a bit like the poker player knowing it's all skill when he's winning but looking for excuses when losing! 

I have an awesome example from the business world that would take too long to explain properly - but basically a product was flying and the company rushed to expand internationally without really understanding WHY it was flying.  Turns out it wasn't the awesome product or superstar salesmen after all - it was a weird UK government quirk that meant the buyers were effectively getting a freeroll on their investment due to a rebate/subsidy.  Said product ended up bombing abroad as actually had no edge over competitors.

Should make sure the profitable stuff is that way for good reason, rather than just running good.

Arguably, yes, but not wholly, not at all. The areas of business expertise I had did not involve "run good". Part of the equation is also how much various parts are making, or losing, the equation is not straightforward. If the loss-making parts are too high, then there will not be a business soon.....

I'll never be able to change my mindset that the area of a business that first needs attending to is the area that is losing money. Two hours a day on that, & an hour a day on the profitable stuff, sorta thing.

I take your point though. The whole thing is a bit chicken & egg. Which brings us back to Milo, in Catch-22.

PS - Not Guilty on the poker analogy, though it fits many. I don't need excuses for losing, I know I'm crap.

[MajorMajor]

I do love a bit of Catch-22!

[AceHighSuited]

Tikay,

You question the backing of horses yet from what I have read you consistently blackball the idea of doubles and trebles.  I understand you have had one go at a lucky 15.  

I fully appreciate its your money on the line, but when your taking the selections of others why are you not taking the advice on the actual bet.  I note you refer to yourself as a dummy sometimes, I certainly don't believe that but you need to move with the times.  Betting singles is not always the bet way to beat the books.  

I don't know who all the posters are on here but there are some very knowledgeable people and I don't get why you wouldn't go with what they say.  I'm sure nobody is trying to put you in a losing position.  This thread fascinates me, both as someone working for a small online bookmaker and as a punter myself.  But sometimes the logic confuses me.  

[rfgqqabc]

The problem with horse racing is its hard to get on in any volume of a decent size- not a problem here really. However, at some point we'll start getting referred, especially if we decide to head into the realms of filthy e/w doubles and trebles. They are probably the number one account closer. Fantastic writeup Ed, those sorts of pieces are why i follow the thread.