Just for completeness. Yesterday I hit the 15:55 (I think, didn't take a screen shot) layed a runner at 12, it won.
Today, first race, Monfass, layed at 18. It won. lol. (My automation would have taken me out with little damage done). Remarkable. I should probably become a backer, seems I'm really good at it. lol.
Finding a loser
-
SeaHorseRacing
- Posts: 2896
- Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 7:06 pm
Unless you have a system, I reckon its just a variable.. soon as you start backing them the speel will probably switch. Sods law.
Just to explain what is happening.
My ruleset selects races where distance is at least 15 f and runners > 5.
Then it starts at the bottom of the favourite list and works its way up until it finds a selection between 12 & 20 odds when it lays a £10 bet just before the off.
The rules then monitor in play and take me out either when a negative Green of £15 is held for 5 seconds or we are about 1 minute from the post.
The average loss on the 4 winners toady would have been £12.09 each. A couple of others ran very close too.
Of course if I'd just backed them each for a tenner today it would have been cigars all round.
My ruleset selects races where distance is at least 15 f and runners > 5.
Then it starts at the bottom of the favourite list and works its way up until it finds a selection between 12 & 20 odds when it lays a £10 bet just before the off.
The rules then monitor in play and take me out either when a negative Green of £15 is held for 5 seconds or we are about 1 minute from the post.
The average loss on the 4 winners toady would have been £12.09 each. A couple of others ran very close too.
Of course if I'd just backed them each for a tenner today it would have been cigars all round.
-
JollyGreen
- Posts: 2047
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am
Surprisingly, no winners Saturday but two today.
Bearing in mind that this is only practice mode and my records are incomplete, I estimate that over the last 7 days, had my automation backed each selection for £10 instead of laying for £10 it would have made about £1200 "on-paper" profit before commission.
On the plus side, I have learned a great deal about how to set up automation rules and I am now quite proficient on the use of signalling. I can now confidently state that I am able to consistently lose money, entirely on autopilot.
On the plus side, I have learned a great deal about how to set up automation rules and I am now quite proficient on the use of signalling. I can now confidently state that I am able to consistently lose money, entirely on autopilot.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
i'd more than bet that reversing to a back based approach will similarly confound your hopes. i've experimented with this contrarian type approach before and found that in reality, there has to be a magical little ingredient that makes the chosen trade a bit special (never found out what of course ).
Out of interest, in your summary of the rule that you use, you mention that you place a lay bet on a runner between 12 and 20 odds. Do you place the chosen trade on the highest odds runner, the lowest or just any random runner that happens to occupy that range at the time??
Just interested to see if the selection is systemised or completely random - good luck next week !!
).Out of interest, in your summary of the rule that you use, you mention that you place a lay bet on a runner between 12 and 20 odds. Do you place the chosen trade on the highest odds runner, the lowest or just any random runner that happens to occupy that range at the time??
Just interested to see if the selection is systemised or completely random - good luck next week !!
-
newaustralian
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 3:40 am
Thanks for the post. I believe laying is the way to go ( along with a money management system). my horse selection method is rather simple. I only lay horses that have at least 2 runs back from a rest and are longish odds. I can detail my method if required - PS this is in Australia only
It is first (lowest priced) selection that the rules come across in the desired range. There is no analysis other than its lay price.jimibt wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2017 6:40 pmOut of interest, in your summary of the rule that you use, you mention that you place a lay bet on a runner between 12 and 20 odds. Do you place the chosen trade on the highest odds runner, the lowest or just any random runner that happens to occupy that range at the time??
Just interested to see if the selection is systemised or completely random - good luck next week !!
interesting, as JG says, some high chance odds going on here, just a matter of figuring how to avoid the 1st selected horse from winning
. You could use further signals of course to track its progress and lay it IR - but only if it's out of contention and above its original BSP.As I said in earlier posts, this was never intended to be a serious strategy, its far too simplistic to work, everyone would be doing it. I bet everyone tries something like this at the start. But now.......its become interesting because of the mathematically weird results (perhaps I've got my maths wrong). I would expect that a selection with odds suggesting a 6% probability of winning must therefore have a 94% probability of losing). Although my results are way off these figures, we must recall that its only been a week and therefore its really only a tiny sample of races. I am assuming that my results to date are purely short-term variance that will correct over time. I am going to continue with it for at least a few days more just to see what happens.
The real problem with this kind of strategy is not just those lays that go on to win, but the percentage of runners that give a good enough show during the race that they first take out any protection you might have in place before going on to lose as expected.
You can't take the chance of letting them run to the end because the losses when they do win will kill you (especially from my sample). You can't even let them run too close to the end because the price volatility nearing the post may well render your "stop" useless ( I had one where the leader/favourite fell at the last and the odds came in, miles past my stop, instantly. The stop triggered, but even though my selection went on to lose as expected, the on-paper loss was almost the same as if it had won by the time practice mode said the stop was filled. It would have been even worse "live" I am sure).
Conversly, if you are too cautious and fearful, you are just as killed by taking stop losses too early/cheaply.
Today, there were only four qualifying races and I had no layed winners.
The real problem with this kind of strategy is not just those lays that go on to win, but the percentage of runners that give a good enough show during the race that they first take out any protection you might have in place before going on to lose as expected.
You can't take the chance of letting them run to the end because the losses when they do win will kill you (especially from my sample). You can't even let them run too close to the end because the price volatility nearing the post may well render your "stop" useless ( I had one where the leader/favourite fell at the last and the odds came in, miles past my stop, instantly. The stop triggered, but even though my selection went on to lose as expected, the on-paper loss was almost the same as if it had won by the time practice mode said the stop was filled. It would have been even worse "live" I am sure).
Conversly, if you are too cautious and fearful, you are just as killed by taking stop losses too early/cheaply.
Today, there were only four qualifying races and I had no layed winners.
Just to illustrate the point above. Today there were 13 qualifying races (UK/IRL) and a £10 lay bet was auto-placed on a single selection in each race. For a change, they all did the decent thing and lost. £130 profit, easy money, look at my wad!
But in reality, as a result of in-play action and various kinds of stop, (linked to time running or negative green up position) intended obviously to limit the potential damage should a high priced lay go horribly wrong, I would still have ended the day with a LOSS of around £25.