Laying a Horse at random

[CaptainMak]

Hi everyone,

I like to lay one horse in a race at random, for example.. I will lay any horse from the favourite out to odds as high as 12, I have no particular reason, I just pick one that I think will lose.

My question is, since doing this for more than a year now I have noticed maybe over .. 60% of the time that horse will go on to win the race, any ideas why?

And the obvious answers will be to back that horse or don't do this system, however surely they should lose more often?

Be great to here your thoughts.

[napshnap]

Hi everyone,

I like to lay one horse in a race at random, for example.. I will lay any horse from the favourite out to odds as high as 12, I have no particular reason, I just pick one that I think will lose.

My question is, since doing this for more than a year now I have noticed maybe over .. 60% of the time that horse will go on to win the race, any ideas why?

And the obvious answers will be to back that horse or don't do this system, however surely they should lose more often?

Be great to here your thoughts.

Looks not so random.

[Derek27]

maybe over .. 60% of the time

Maybe over 60% of the time doesn't mean anything - or it means may or may not be over 60%. Have you actually calculated the percentage winners and your stake/returns?

[spreadbetting]

Hi everyone,

I like to lay one horse in a race at random, for example.. I will lay any horse from the favourite out to odds as high as 12, I have no particular reason, I just pick one that I think will lose.

Like napshap says it's hardly a random system with you ignoring the favourite, only going to 12 and actually picking one you think will lose.

You're picking a horse to lose out of the odds set that is most likely to win, I doubt you're hitting a 60% strike rate it's just we usually remember the ones that go against us rather than the winners or you're just looking at a small sample set. With exchange odds being so close to true probabilities you'll always struggle to win long term even if you were laying totally random.

[CaptainMak]

hmmm I think I need to research this on my own and gather data before asking this question to the community.

Im going to do this method for the next 10 races and will publish my findings later today.

[Derek27]

You'll need much more data than 10 races to draw any firm conclusions. You also need to record the price of each horse and your profit/loss.

I don't know exactly what you want to prove as it's fairly obvious such a random strategy will make a small percentage loss after commission.

[CaptainMak]

You'll need much more data than 10 races to draw any firm conclusions. You also need to record the price of each horse and your profit/loss.

I don't know exactly what you want to prove as it's fairly obvious such a random strategy will make a small percentage loss after commission.

I agree more races would be needed for an accurate result, and obviously prices plus profit/loss would be needed to draw conclusions.

However i dont agree that it would gain a small percentage loss over time as i believe the losses would be huge over time.

[MemphisFlash]

so if that is what you are thinking, why are you even considering it. surely you've answered your own question now?

[CaptainMak]

so if that is what you are thinking, why are you even considering it. surely you've answered your own question now?

Yeh i have. I think its just that it irritates me as i always assumed it would be easy to lay say 1 horse every race. But that fact is it just isn't. Maybe someone is watching me

[MemphisFlash]

even a broken watch is right twice a day!!!

[ShaunWhite]

i always assumed it would be easy to lay say 1 horse every race. But that fact is it just isn't.

Oh yeah, it's really easy, everyone on my town does it and they all drive around in Rollers.

You're wrong about losing a lot over time, Derek is right, you're losses would amount to the commission you were paying on your gains. You need to search the forum for 'efficient market'.

[Derek27]

However i dont agree that it would gain a small percentage loss over time as i believe the losses would be huge over time.

The size of the loss is different to the percentage loss. The percentage loss should remain consistent the the quantity of loss will grow over time.

You really need to improve your understanding of betting/trading to get anywhere on the exchange. It is easy to pick a few horses that's unlikely to win, but there is a catch - the price of horses that aren't likely to win are higher and will wipe out any profit if you lay them!!!

[wearthefoxhat]

Hi everyone,

I like to lay one horse in a race at random, for example.. I will lay any horse from the favourite out to odds as high as 12, I have no particular reason, I just pick one that I think will lose.

My question is, since doing this for more than a year now I have noticed maybe over .. 60% of the time that horse will go on to win the race, any ideas why?

And the obvious answers will be to back that horse or don't do this system, however surely they should lose more often?

Be great to here your thoughts.

Maybe... trade one at random.

Choose any old selection and then read up on its' quirks. ie: Front runner, Held up type..is it a market mover on the day? If a steamer/drifter? Check the chart momentum trend.Check the previous Hi/lo betfair figure in-play...

At least that way you're thinking about the type of trade required and can learn from a red or green trade after the race.

[ANGELS15]

Hi CaptainMak. You mention that you pick horses at random that you think might lose. I beleive that if you wanted to become a good/professional layer you will need a really good sound approach/methodology. Do you have a really good knowlege of racing and how horses are assesed/handicapped?

However even with that I've found that the Exchange markets are really accurate re the chances of the favourites. I remember when I first got a Betfair account in 2002 I was really excited as I now had the chance to take on all the dodgy favourites that I often saw. The first week or so it seemed to go quite well. I believed I had good reasoning to lay things. Fortunately I experimented with small stakes. However things very quickly went against me. Over a couple of weeks I laid 40 horses and 28 of them won! I recall a 30 runner handicap at Ascot. Around a dozen of the runners had won at least their last 4 races. Frankie Dettori was on the 5/1 favourite which I laid albeit for a small stake, I couldn't beleive it when it routed the field.

There are things you can research through the form. These days I rarely lay something outright preferring to trade or offset in running. However it's really about the value if you're laying or backing. Ask yourself if the favourite for a 2m novice hurdle at Newbury was an ex flat horse whose best form had been around 6f would it really deserve to be 11/8 when you've got a couple of bumper winners and an ex winning pointer that had recently been bought for 50,000 guineas in the field?

[wearthefoxhat]

Hi CaptainMak. You mention that you pick horses at random that you think might lose. I beleive that if you wanted to become a good/professional layer you will need a really good sound approach/methodology. Do you have a really good knowlege of racing and how horses are assesed/handicapped?

However even with that I've found that the Exchange markets are really accurate re the chances of the favourites. I remember when I first got a Betfair account in 2002 I was really excited as I now had the chance to take on all the dodgy favourites that I often saw. The first week or so it seemed to go quite well. I believed I had good reasoning to lay things. Fortunately I experimented with small stakes. However things very quickly went against me. Over a couple of weeks I laid 40 horses and 28 of them won! I recall a 30 runner handicap at Ascot. Around a dozen of the runners had won at least their last 4 races. Frankie Dettori was on the 5/1 favourite which I laid albeit for a small stake, I couldn't beleive it when it routed the field.

There are things you can research through the form. These days I rarely lay something outright preferring to trade or offset in running. However it's really about the value if you're laying or backing. Ask yourself if the favourite for a 2m novice hurdle at Newbury was an ex flat horse whose best form had been around 6f would it really deserve to be 11/8 when you've got a couple of bumper winners and an ex winning pointer that had recently been bought for 50,000 guineas in the field?

Regards Laying as an overall subject, I would initially always look at trainerform. A good indicator is the RTF% of a trainer. If less than 40% and deteriorating compared the previous days RTF%, then I would focus on that trainers runners, maybe less than 10/1 or so. This isn't random, but can be randomly chosen from the list created.

RTF % - indicates the percentage of a trainer’s horses who run to form in past 16 days

Todays Race @ Haydock 3.15:

Hayd315.PNG

Bako De La Saulaie 33% (Rose Dobbin)
Just Georgie 33% (Sue Smith)
Hills of Dubai 36% (Donald McCain)

Choose any one of the 3. (In this example they all lost)

From my records: Donald McCain was previously 37% whereas Rose Dobbin was 25%, Sue Smith was 35% so would choose D.Mc, then Sue Smith over Rose Dobbin to lay their horses.

It makes a good starting point and you can filter other stuff into the mix with regards Jockey or Class of race....etc..