mardigras

Yep, you can work out scenarios based on medium level losing runs. It does come down to the spread of chance, but I'd think 0.5% would be more sustainable. Or if you're going to go high, change from level stakes to a % of bank basis. In a series backing 15% chances, each run has close to a 4% chance of giving you 20 losses in a row. Do that twice and you're basically broke. Backing 4-5% chances will make that more likely and be more impacting. % of bank definitely absorbs some of that issue.

You'd be well up barryb, only someone who needs to do remedial maths would think otherwise.

What's laughable is that he actually thinks I was claiming the quinella. That was rubbing in the bullshit masterclass crap. What I can claim, is that I suggested backing my lowest priced selection and laying off the two favs. Pretty good result if you ask me. He's simply stupid.

Try and read this. No change in assessment of horse. Change in chance assessment. Pretty clear unless you're Thomass.

If you continue with your stupidity, I will just ignore you. My post stated I change chance based on track conditions. Chance is ALWAYS based on the time I assess the horse is likely to run. Since I model all of the horse's on time to get chance. Clear yet? The time range is based on the horse's ability ignoring track condition. The final estimated time fits in that time range and moves based on the confidence associated with the horse and the current race conditions. If a range for a horse is 71 to 72, then the time I assess will always be within 71 to 72 on that track condition, no matter how confident I am that the track condition is most suited to the horse. If I am 80% confident, the time may be 71.2. If I'm 20% confident, the time will still be between 71 and 72 and be closer to 72. The ability displayed by the horse sets the range, not the track conditions. They make a minor adjustment based on confidence of data You're just so thick, it is hard to fathom.

Correct. I don't assessment track condition when assessing the horse's ability. Sure did, compared to other horses. I'm not confused. I only assess the horse's ability ignoring track condition.

You seem intent in ruining every thread because you're too thick to understand. What part of time range did you not understand? If I have a horse running a time of say 71.5 to 72.5. But my confidence level is 40%. Then I believe it will run on the higher side of that time range compared to a horse with the same time range that I have a 70% confidence in. So since I model it and I only know how to model it on a normal distribution, I shift the position within that timeframe based on the confidence. The result is that the midpoint for the time is different between the two horses. The one with less confidence with be at a higher time, the one with greater confidence will be at a lower time. Same assessment of horse ability, two horses. Different final assessed times. All due to confidence around my assessment and the conditions the race will be run under.

Wrong again. My assessment was the same. The chances changed, exactly as per my post. Twit. Not every horse will change in confidence when track conditions change. Some will be greater confidence, some will be less. Simple. The time is the midpoint of the range of time associated with that assessment and that confidence.

Good points barry. I don't change my assessment of the horse for track conditions or distance, but I do change my confidence in that assessment, which ultimately can effect my chance %. Left and right handed is also something I use to adjust confidence. Things like that where the ability of the horse has not been shown as yet under the conditions of the race.

Yep, likely little difference between a 3 and a 5 in my view, but as per the Bonecrusher, my prices shifted a reasonable amount from an 8 to a 4. And definitely distance, as for me that is a major component of my confidence level around my assessment of the horse's ability.

All good Steve. when I say a 10% chance, I'm no longer believing that to be opinion. So it comes down to whether your assessment is an accurate representation of chance. And you'll only know that if over a reasonable period, your 20% selections win 20% of the time and your 10% chance selections win 10% of the time and so on, across every value. Since after the race, there is a 100% chance that the winner won. I'd rather not bet (or just have a bet for interest sake) than back a $2 runner that I thought would win, but realistically thought it was a 40% chance. I'm gonna win on a lot of races, but my account is likely to be below where it started, financially.

And I'm not saying you can't if you think you can make an adjustment for the trainer/jockey for the horse you are assessing, then that is your call. I'm saying I don't adjust because I wouldn't know how to. I'd be interested to hear how you would go about doing that.

Would 10 winners out of 30 be better than 4 winners out of 100? What if the trainer with 10 winners ran 30 horses at evens (or with an expected chance of 50%) And the trainer with 4 winners ran 100 horses at 100-1 (or with an expected chance of 1%). And how do you adjust the chance of an individual horse based on that anyway? Or the same for a jockey. Supposedly better jockeys will get a higher proportion of supposedly better chances. Which should lead to a self fulfilling proposition.

That's why I omit it from the assessment. It's the same with the trainer. Does a trainer improve a horse and to what degree? if it's already been racing for the trainer, then there is nothing extra to assess. If it shifts to a new trainer, how do you decide whether the new trainer is able to make the horse's performance improve from what it has shown already - and even if you could, by what exactly?

Interesting curious. I don't adjust chance for any of "trainer, jockey, barrier draw, carried weight, gear changes or class of race" either. Of all those the only thing I do is not back a runner if I think the jockey is useless. More than likely an unnecessary piece of subjectivity.

I'll add a response to this here from another thread. To add something to the picking winners ideas versus value. Two main things I will comment on regarding a) betfair and b) value. a) Betfair: Since betfair arrived and once it gets to the point of reasonable liquidity, what it does give punters in an overall sense of things as a decent guide to chance. It's not necessarily perfect but it has become the market leader. Even the bookies will tend to use betfair (not NZ racing), as the guide to pricing. When betfair is down, they are more often like headless chooks because they have started to rely on it so much - perhaps too much. So if you want a guide to chance (as a way to give yourself a guide, then as the race gets close, it isn't a bad one). If you wait till then, of course you may well have missed the boat since many bookies will shift based on shifts on betfair. And as mentioned previously. To get the best out of betfair, patience on odds is important. The fluctuations can be massive. If you strongly believe the odds are going to shorten, by all means take the offer. But in general, patience will reward you better such is the competitive nature of those trying to lay the horses. b) Value: One of the hardest things I think that punters that are new to value is understanding that it isn't about winning each race. It is about winning at the rate that your assessment suggests it should. So if you rate a horse as a 10% chance and it's paying 15s. You should EXPECT to lose. Since the reality is you believe your horse only has a 1 in 10 chance of winning. So 90% chance of NOT winning. So a good way of thinking about that is not to expect to win race to race, but be expecting to win overall. Since after backing 100 horse as 10% chances, each paying 15s, you'd be expecting that 10 of them won and you'd be nicely rewarded. So again, it's a patience thing. You're not trying to find the winner of the race, you're trying to find the horse(s) that if you back them continually at the right chance level, you will win. For some, that takes a lot to get their head around. Thinking a horse at $4 is the winner of the next race, and then backing something at 12s which loses(which you thought was a 14% chance), is to be often expected. If you thought the $4 winner was a 30% chance, then maybe you should have backed it. If it was a 20% chance (and still therefore reasonably likely to win), it just isn't a good bet. It's easy to see the ones you missed backing, but punters often forget the ones they would have backed. It's a disciplined approach to punting if the end game is profit. If the end game is fun, then it makes little difference trying to be so disciplined. Have fun and accept what you get.

Can't see anything myself in the 6th that is enough value for me to bet on. Closest would be Serenity for me but would need to go out to about $9-$10. As far as assessing a horse goes, I don't look at last start any more than other starts. I am looking to build up a view of the horse's ability and under what conditions it seems to present it's ability best to try and work out how each horse sits relative to the horses it's racing against. I don't think there is necessarily a right way, but my expectation would be that focusing on the most recent start is unlikely to present many options as value since most punters are assessing horses in a similar way to that.

What: Single tier. Similar to a HK model. Start from the bottom with sufficient level to provide owner enough to pay a months fees from a couple of 3rd or 4ths. Work up from there based on affordability. Focus on growing this business to increase that over time. Why: NZ horses are not geographically separated. End result is that horses from within a single grade race when the scheduling allows. There isn't any delineation between what is a tier one horse and a tier two horse. They all just race each other. It is totally different in that regard to Australia where the horses are geographically separated based on the tiers. And the associated costs are separated as well. You will pay more for a trainer predominantly racing o the metro tier than you will for one that races predominantly provincial or country. It's trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. It doesn't fit.

That structure just shows how far out of touch Messara is, and what was the point getting someone entrenched in the Australian model to come to NZ and suggest ideas. The stake structure we have is killing racing. And he wants to make it more so.

Sure. Clearly you thought those original prices were 'stupid az'. That's the level of your masterclass. Too scared to even front up. Loser.

Hi Newmarket, just saw this post. Happy to have a think about that and see what I can contribute.

Absolutely brilliant Hedley!

Talk about a masterclass My top 4 selections, 3 above my odds on TAB, the 3 gets the Q - $63. The two favs, not placed. There you go Thomass. Easy. Even better oldandtired.

As at this morning. Odds for some are without removal of #13. TAB market set at 126%! Bonecrusher Stakes # Runner Predicted Time mardi TAB FTF barryb Newmarket oldandtired curious 1 Bocce 1:25.30 $17.00 $14.00 n/a $9.00 n/a n/a $25.00 2 Star Performance 1:24.72 $4.00 $8.50 n/a $4.00 n/a $5.00 $7.00 3 Masetto 1:25.23 $12.00 $4.40 $10.98 n/a n/a $6.00 $11.00 4 Total Excess 1:25.32 $18.00 $4.60 $6.95 $6.00 $6.00 $20.00 $11.00 5 Spirits Aubeer 1:25.16 $11.00 $8.00 n/a n/a n/a $8.00 $16.00 6 Cavallo Veloce 1:25.26 $14.50 $21.00 n/a $12.50 $11.00 $10.00 $24.00 7 Hypos 1:25.26 $16.00 $11.00 $9.97 n/a n/a $8.00 $10.00 8 Cantstopthefeeling 1:25.41 $24.00 $14.00 n/a n/a $11.00 n/a $25.00 9 Langkawi 1:25.13 $11.00 $8.00 $9.54 $10.00 $5.00 n/a $7.00 10 Quizmaster 1:25.58 $34.00 $16.00 n/a n/a n/a $20.00 $20.00 11 Roll The Dice 1:25.23 $14.50 $35.00 $8.65 n/a n/a n/a $18.00 12 Surely Sacred 1:25.12 $10.00 $13.00 $11.64 n/a $8.00 $10.00 $11.00 For me, if betting, I'd be on Star Performance clearly. If I was laying, I'd still be laying Total Excess and even Masetto. TAB shortener is Cantstopthefeeling from $23 to $14.

Update - odds may change Bonecrusher Stakes # Runner Predicted Time Chance% mardi TAB FTF barryb Newmarket Curious Thomass 9 Langkawi 1:26.94 16.95 $5.90 $8.00 $9.54 $10.00 $5.00 2 Star Performance 1:26.94 16.67 $6.00 $9.50 n/a $4.00 n/a 12 Surely Sacred 1:26.94 14.29 $7.00 $13.00 $11.64 n/a $8.00 7 Hypos 1:27.18 10.00 $10.00 $11.00 $9.97 n/a n/a 5 Spirits Aubeer 1:27.27 8.33 $12.00 $8.00 n/a n/a n/a 11 Roll The Dice 1:27.27 8.00 $12.50 $35.00 $8.65 n/a n/a 3 Masetto 1.27.29 6.06 $16.50 $4.20 $10.98 n/a n/a 8 Cantstopthefeeling 1.27.29 5.26 $19.00 $23.00 n/a n/a $11.00 6 Cavallo Veloce 1:27.29 4.17 $24.00 $21.00 n/a $12.50 $11.00 1 Bocce 1:27.29 3.85 $26.00 $13.00 n/a $9.00 n/a 10 Quizmaster 1:27.29 3.70 $27.00 $16.00 n/a n/a n/a 4 Total Excess 1:27.30 2.50 $40.00 $4.80 $6.95 $6.00 $6.00 13 Musical Blues 1:27.73 0.20 $500.00 $31.00 n/a n/a n/a 99.98