If you lay every favourite that is heavily backed and back every favourite that drifts like a barge, would you not show a profit?
After all the horses don’t know what price they are...
I know this is devilishly simple but sometimes simple is best.
Answers on a postcard...
B
Backing high / laying low
Remember favourites cover a wide price spectrum. You could have a 7/1 favourite in a 25 runner race or a 1/4 favourite in a 6 runner race. If in the first instance it was wide open betting and the favourite had started off say co-favourite of 3 at 9/1 and was now clear favourite at 7/1, even in a 25 runner race would you want to lay it?Balmus wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:24 amIf you lay every favourite that is heavily backed and back every favourite that drifts like a barge, would you not show a profit?
After all the horses don’t know what price they are...
I know this is devilishly simple but sometimes simple is best.
Answers on a postcard...
B
Ever since exchanges took off the market is a lot more informed as to horse's chances and what to make favourite. I can't remember the exact race it may have been yesterday but a favourite was forcast odds on in the racecard but drifted to about 6/4, it still won.
Yea don’t mind paying any price if it’s value. Basically if something is being smashed in from 3-say 2 in the last 5 mins I would lay it all day at 2.02.
I get the “the market is efficient as a whole” mantra, clearly each runner is not always efficient as the ladders are up and down like a yo-yo.
If anyone has any data to add to this thread to either prove me right or wrong, fire away.
A bookmaker doesn’t really have much choice in what he/she wants to lay but as a layer on here you do. If a horse is 2/1 all day with 365 and sports books that make a shit tone of money each year, why isn’t laying the same horse at 2.02 profitable long term.
I get the “the market is efficient as a whole” mantra, clearly each runner is not always efficient as the ladders are up and down like a yo-yo.
If anyone has any data to add to this thread to either prove me right or wrong, fire away.
A bookmaker doesn’t really have much choice in what he/she wants to lay but as a layer on here you do. If a horse is 2/1 all day with 365 and sports books that make a shit tone of money each year, why isn’t laying the same horse at 2.02 profitable long term.
The horses don't know what prices they are, but the people smashing them in may know a bit more.Balmus wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2020 12:24 amIf you lay every favourite that is heavily backed and back every favourite that drifts like a barge, would you not show a profit?
After all the horses don’t know what price they are...
I know this is devilishly simple but sometimes simple is best.
Answers on a postcard...
B
In that situation, when the horse is trading at 2.02 on the exchange, Bet365 and the sportsbook will have knocked the price down to 4/5. Basically, they've been caught with their pants down, have limited the damage and the values gone. You might find that 50% of such horses win, in which case you'll break even and the guys who got the 2/1 will be the profiteers.
-
ShaunWhite
- Posts: 10631
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
So what you are all saying is the market is always efficient 
Obviously they are not, selections are clearly over bet and overreact a LOT.
Maybe there is a different angle to just straight laying and backing. Possibly these selections retrace to a more sensible price IR.
B
Obviously they are not, selections are clearly over bet and overreact a LOT.
Maybe there is a different angle to just straight laying and backing. Possibly these selections retrace to a more sensible price IR.
B
Your opening post suggests that you are looking to oppose market sentiment when a horse shortening in price for whatever reason looks to many in having a better chance of winning than before. I can`t see how that represents a value Lay on that basis
Peter did a good video explains how markets can be both efficient yet inefficient
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5YyGGUxZXM
-
ShaunWhite
- Posts: 10631
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
If there's efficiency at scale (and there is) then it's statistically virtually impossible for all of the constituents to be equally 'efficient'. But it's also impossible to say which individual ones aren't and by how much. You don't need to know about trading and horses because that's just logic and some maths.
80,000 horses a year can't all be running at exactly the 'right' price and when a 3.0 winner comes in it's not possible to know if that horse on that day, at that moment should have been say 2.8 or 3.2.
80,000 horses a year can't all be running at exactly the 'right' price and when a 3.0 winner comes in it's not possible to know if that horse on that day, at that moment should have been say 2.8 or 3.2.