Lovely backdrop, Bradford's changed since my last visitPredicton wrote:Curious, I'm looking at it now. What an horrendous photo. Completely spoils the view
The ten fastest ways to the poor house.
Thanks Prediction! 
BTW, are you backing any of the horses in the 13:35 at Hereford? Quite a few of the horses are over 100.0 on Betfair, and I wonder whether, if the favourite falls, they might have a far better shout of at least placing than their odds suggest. For example, Roman Landing is available at 1000.0, but came third in his/her race before last.
Jeff
BTW, are you backing any of the horses in the 13:35 at Hereford? Quite a few of the horses are over 100.0 on Betfair, and I wonder whether, if the favourite falls, they might have a far better shout of at least placing than their odds suggest. For example, Roman Landing is available at 1000.0, but came third in his/her race before last.
Jeff
Predicton wrote:You'll have to bear with me Jeff, I'm a dinosaur when it comes to computing, however the address of my profile which has a link to the blog is :-
http://www.blogger.com/profile/07000151143897735977
I hope that helps,
cheers, P
Hi Jeff,
No I won't be betting in those races, I'd need to have a reason and I haven't for those horses. I'm very cautious by upbringing and I need to be satisfied that I will profit from any gamble "in the long run" before. It's one reason that I'm still messing about with tiny trades after 17 months with BA, that and the fact that I'm a lousy trader,
cheers, P
No I won't be betting in those races, I'd need to have a reason and I haven't for those horses. I'm very cautious by upbringing and I need to be satisfied that I will profit from any gamble "in the long run" before. It's one reason that I'm still messing about with tiny trades after 17 months with BA, that and the fact that I'm a lousy trader,
cheers, P
Fair enough.
I would have saved lots of money over the years had I taken a more cautious approach! And it was only when I began betting with extreme discipline that I began to make money consistently, rather than lose money consistently!
Jeff
I would have saved lots of money over the years had I taken a more cautious approach! And it was only when I began betting with extreme discipline that I began to make money consistently, rather than lose money consistently!
Jeff
Predicton wrote:Hi Jeff,
No I won't be betting in those races, I'd need to have a reason and I haven't for those horses. I'm very cautious by upbringing and I need to be satisfied that I will profit from any gamble "in the long run" before. It's one reason that I'm still messing about with tiny trades after 17 months with BA, that and the fact that I'm a lousy trader,
cheers, P
I've done the laying the outsider thing before, started off laying them for about £10's, when I kept winning I upped it till I was laying outsiders for about £150 (odds over 10) 
I wasn't doing it all the time because I knew it was risky but if I had a big red I'd end up in play waiting for a horse to give me a sign he was giving up and I'd be laying! needles to say I took a few massive losses
Overall a bad strategy and definitely a fast way to the poor house. It took me a while to get out the habit of it as well.
I wasn't doing it all the time because I knew it was risky but if I had a big red I'd end up in play waiting for a horse to give me a sign he was giving up and I'd be laying! needles to say I took a few massive losses
Overall a bad strategy and definitely a fast way to the poor house. It took me a while to get out the habit of it as well.-
fink nottle
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:42 am
[quote="Ferru123"]Hi Prediction
'Re: Longer odds horses - My guess is that the bookies know when they are offering a value bet, but are still happy to do so with outsiders. Partly, because it balances their books. And also, it fools the betting public into assuming the horse is a no-hoper, possibly reducing the bookmaker's liability if fewer bets are placed on it as a result.'
Not sure why the intelligent bookmaker would want to lay a value price about an outside just to 'balance the book' when he can have the value for himself?
'Re: Longer odds horses - My guess is that the bookies know when they are offering a value bet, but are still happy to do so with outsiders. Partly, because it balances their books. And also, it fools the betting public into assuming the horse is a no-hoper, possibly reducing the bookmaker's liability if fewer bets are placed on it as a result.'
Not sure why the intelligent bookmaker would want to lay a value price about an outside just to 'balance the book' when he can have the value for himself?
But who would take his bet?
Also, I suspect that one of the bookies' main challenges is that, every time a favourite wins, they take a big hit. So I think they'd be interested in anything that would minimise the impact of that.
Jeff
Also, I suspect that one of the bookies' main challenges is that, every time a favourite wins, they take a big hit. So I think they'd be interested in anything that would minimise the impact of that.
Jeff
fink nottle wrote:Ferru123 wrote:Hi Prediction
Not sure why the intelligent bookmaker would want to lay a value price about an outside just to 'balance the book' when he can have the value for himself?
-
fink nottle
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:42 am
Ferru123 wrote:But who would take his bet?
Also, I suspect that one of the bookies' main challenges is that, every time a favourite wins, they take a big hit. So I think they'd be interested in anything that would minimise the impact of that.
Jeff
fink nottle wrote:Ferru123 wrote:Hi Prediction
Not sure why the intelligent bookmaker would want to lay a value price about an outside just to 'balance the book' when he can have the value for himself?
He would'nt need to place a bet, in not laying what he believes is a value price the horse runs for him ie. he does'nt give the value away but keeps it for himself. Bookmakers have their opinions and choose to duck certain horses or lay others. The majority of turnover in a large proportion of races is at the front end of the market and this where the book balancing would be concentrated.
Hi Fink Nottle
I agree that the bulk of the book balancing would be at the front of the book. That's not to say that it doesn't happen with larger priced horses too, however.
If I back a 12-1 horse, then I'm minimizing the bookie's potential losses if the favourite wins. The bookie could offer me odds of 10-1 instead, but if I don't see those as value odds, I won't place the bet. It imagine it boils down to what the bookie sees the price elasticity of demand as being, ie for every 1% increase in the price offered, what the increase in demand is. So it may be a win-win situation for the bookie to give me the 12-1 odds.
Jeff
I agree that the bulk of the book balancing would be at the front of the book. That's not to say that it doesn't happen with larger priced horses too, however.
If I back a 12-1 horse, then I'm minimizing the bookie's potential losses if the favourite wins. The bookie could offer me odds of 10-1 instead, but if I don't see those as value odds, I won't place the bet. It imagine it boils down to what the bookie sees the price elasticity of demand as being, ie for every 1% increase in the price offered, what the increase in demand is. So it may be a win-win situation for the bookie to give me the 12-1 odds.
Jeff
fink nottle wrote: He would'nt need to place a bet, in not laying what he believes is a value price the horse runs for him ie. he does'nt give the value away but keeps it for himself. Bookmakers have their opinions and choose to duck certain horses or lay others. The majority of turnover in a large proportion of races is at the front end of the market and this where the book balancing would be concentrated.