Improving picks and process

sharkey 25

Hi

Im looking for some advice from you on How you decide on your picks? I enjoy betting on horses and have had some successes but overall have no doubt that I am a losing punter.

I have decided to track my bets and hope to limit losses by so hoping to avoid common pitfalls like backing selections that have no value compared to their chances of winning.

A difficulty i sometime have is that there is so much racing on that I find it hard to understand which meetings/race type to hone in on. I would appreciate if you could advise on who you find the most suitable meetings or race type for betting. For example im taking a look at tomorrows races at the Dublin racing festival but finding it hard to pick many IE I can make a good case for more than one in the races. I had thought that perhaps zoning in on AW racing might be an idea as you naturally confine yourself to 1/2 meetings a day.

Also when looking at a race card what type of things do you factor in when picking selections? How long do you honestly spend working to a conclusion?

My idea is to spend some more time (probably the evening before) picking some selections. In this regard I wouldn't intend to pay for any online subscriptions so would appreciate advice on the best free resources. I hope to keep the volume of bets reasonable and track how i get on over the next while.

All general hints/tips would be appreciated, ive read some threads on here and can see that there are knowledgeable petiole about.

Thanks

Andrew00

What I do now is just lump on certs or info, which means I might have 1 bet a month or more.

You're going to lose too much betting everyday of the week

Imhof Tank

My god the naivety. Don't get into punting to make money. People here may be knowledgeable but 99.99% of punters are mugs at heart, way down over the long term, and I include myself in that.

Slattsy

Follow Goat. Simple way to make $$$$

posturingpat

Imhof Tank wrote: »

My god the naivety. Don't get into punting to make money. People here may be knowledgeable but 99.99% of punters are mugs at heart, way down over the long term, and I include myself in that.

Completely agree. I'd have myself as one of the better clued up punters and not a hope am I up long term.
Look at it as a hobby that you've a set amount to spend on each week/month/year that may pay out on occasion.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't put the effort in and give yourself a chance. When you spot a handicapper that bolts in at 16/1 it's a buzz like few other.

Mysterypunter

Pack it in or back outsiders

MaxBet

Stick to the AW , easy money .....

Whiplash85

I rarely back favourites. If favourites were to win the majority of the time horse racing would not be profitable for Bookies. This also ties in with a horse that won last time out. If it is a handicap race usually said horse will have to attain a level that he or she hasn't done before. If they win last time out they often are market leaders next day out and are under a penalty. 99% of races are not Grade 1s or Grade 3s so this strategy hasn't lead me too far astray.

I look at trends instead and maybe one that is slipping down to a winnable mark.

The Tetrarch

I can only tell you what I do.

• Flat only for me. That way you save money from November to April. You can not be an expert on everything in racing
• Do not bet on short distance races, 5f, 6f, 7f. Luck in running is too large a factor.
• Do not bet on low level races, class 3, class 4, class 5, class 6 (UK banding).
• Do not bet on handicaps, unless you have an exceptional insight into a factor that will influence the race.
• Ask yourself what others are thinking about when they analyse a race.
  A horse with a string of wins will be a low price, but those wins may be in lower grade races, or different tracks, or different ground, or even last year.
  Punters tend to favour horses with few runs. They think the inexperienced horse must improve. Often the more experienced horse is "more experienced".
  Another mistake is doing fancy calculations with the weight carried by the horse and beaten lengths. Best to ignore that. Taking weight off a horse does not speed it up.
  And punters thing heavy ground will suit the lighter weighed horses. Rubbish.
  Last year (?) at The Curragh I backed the top weight in consecutive races (handicaps) on heavy. Both won at big odds. The only unfortunate thing was I only won about 500 Euro as they were interest bets to stop me getting bored.
  You have to figure out what everyone is thinking. They will back down the popular (often misguided) choice. It can be comforting to go with the crowd. The title of professional gambler Alan Potts book was "Against the Crowd".
  Do what the crowd do, get the result the crowd get. They might pick more winners, but the aim is to make profit, not pick winners
• Do not bet with bookmakers, on course, or online. Join a betting exchange as the odds are significantly better (bookmaker margins range from 10% up to 50+%, exchanges have a 5% margin). You will have plenty of losers. Big odds winners pay for losers.
• Have very few bets, perhaps a dozen a year, but bigger bets.
• Bet at big odds. Often ignored by punters is the simple truth that you get paid more when you have a winner at bigger odds.
• When a horse you choose is a bigger price than you expected increase the size of your bet.
  Many increase their bet size when a horse is favourite or odds on - not sensible.
  My biggest win paid 75s (74/1 less 5% commission = 70.3/1. Bookmakers paid 33/1 on that horse. I won 2.13 times what I would have won if I backed with bookmakers. Remember this.).
  My biggest odds win was 91.90 (stake a fiver). The horse ran three times that month: a win over 8f in a 0-80 handicap at The Curragh, 5th of 7 in a 60-90 handicap at Tipperary beaten 2 1/4 lengths, then it won at odds of 91.90 over 8f in a 0-80 handicap at The Curragh. The horse was only doing again what it proved it could do.
  What this points out is that punters are very influenced by one "bad run", especially the previous run. In this case the run was at a higher level, and only beaten a couple of lengths.
  I love to check out the form of a runner that finished 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th or worse in its last race.
• You need to have an edge. Do you have an edge? Do you read, do you analyse, do you have any knowledge that others do not (or only a tiny number have) e.g. the draw at a racecourse, the going at a racecourse, wind direction, pedigree of the runners (class, distance suitability).
• Forget about tips. Forget about inside knowledge. Do you really think people would tell you the winner. Why would they tell you and ruin the price?
  
  You will not have an edge unless you work hard. Do not expect easy money.

IAMAMORON

Never back more than you can afford to lose.

Stick to group races on the flat, there is less corruption as all the money is in breeding, not prizemoney.

Stick to the big festivals for National Hunt, look out for the biggest owners, they pour money into racing and need something back.

Get over yourself if you haven't backed a winner in 7 weeks, it happens to everyone. Don't ever chase losses, that is when the bookies' really catch you with your trousers down and your arse in the air.

Get a stake plan and stick to it. There is nothing worse than having a fiver each way winner at 33/1 and then dumping hundreds on even money losers. If you fancy a 33/1 shot have fifty each way on it. The most money I ever won backing horses was on the price.

Enjoy yourself and make it fun.

The Tetrarch

sharkey 25 wrote: »

Hi
I have decided to track my bets and hope to limit losses by so hoping to avoid common pitfalls like backing selections that have no value compared to their chances of winning.

You will hear and read about value betting. After fifty years betting I have no idea how you can tell if a bet is a value bet. Some will say it is value, some will say it isn't. Opinions make the market.

sharkey 25 wrote: »

A difficulty i sometime have is that there is so much racing on that I find it hard to understand which meetings/race type to hone in on.

I bet only on the flat, and tend to not be interested in the racing in April and May. The need for action (the desire to bet) is a big problem.
If I buy the Racing Post I will ignore race meeting at the lesser tracks - betting fodder, little difference between the horses, pot luck, they take it in turns to win.
Immediately I look at the races at the big meeting(s) and perhaps have an interest in two out of seven races on a card. I concentrate on these, and may decide to not have a bet (often a very important decision).

sharkey 25 wrote: »

I would appreciate if you could advise on who you find the most suitable meetings or race type for betting. For example im taking a look at tomorrows races at the Dublin racing festival but finding it hard to pick many IE I can make a good case for more than one in the races.

When you see the word Festival do not bet. These Festivals tend to be festivals for bookmakers, fan fests, and mean odds.
I do not follow jumps racing but my guess is Cheltenham is the objective and this meeting is just a filler to keep interest going until the real action in March.
You do not need to bet.

sharkey 25 wrote: »

I had thought that perhaps zoning in on AW racing might be an idea as you naturally confine yourself to 1/2 meetings a day.

I tried this in the 1990s. Too many low class horses.
Ask yourself which is the better betting choice, low class races with small prizemoney (about the size of a moderate winning bet), or high class races with large prizemoney (jumps), or on the flat large prizemoney and breeding value worth millions to the winning owner. You can be certain the horses are trying for the big prizes.
Low value races are races that will be/could be manipulated in betting coups by connections of the horse to cover the cost of buying the horses and training the horse.
You are picking the best horse in the race on form (difficult to know) and then trying to guess the intentions of the connections (impossible to know).

sharkey 25 wrote: »

Also when looking at a race card what type of things do you factor in when picking selections? How long do you honestly spend working to a conclusion?

How long do I spend analysing a race?
My first big win was in the 1992 English Derby, 3,500 pounds win, nice money 30 years ago, Dr Devious at 12/1 and 10/1. I had bought Timeform Perspective, loose leaf A4 size, about 400 pages. I spent three nights going through the form of the 19 runner field, about 15 hours. There was a preview on BBC TV of the Derby field. I recorded that and watched it several times. There was an article in The Sporting Life Weekender by Nick Mordin where he used the Dosage Index and form to reduce the possible winners to 5 horses (4 ran). I decided Dr Devious was the bet. Strangely that horse ran in the Kentucky Derby (7th) the previous month, and on his way back was held up in Germany and spent a night in a zoo. Travel abroad by horses was uncommon thirty years ago.

How long did I spend analysing before my win in the 2012 Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe at 75s?
In this case I had recorded the finishing position and draw position of all Arc runners for about 30 years. It was a bit like on a cookery program "this is one I prepared earlier".
I knew my pick was favoured by the draw, and the big danger was drawn badly 18 of 18. The favourite was imo over-raced and likely to be jaded.
And I knew something about the ground that few knew or bothered about. It was heavy (everyone knew) and the soil is clay (few knew the significance).
With many neagtives about the fancied horses I though my pick, 75s on the exchanges, was about a 6/1 chance.
Here I will admit in 2019 I backed the horses that finished last in The English Derby, last in the English Oaks, and last in another big race (thankfully I've forgotten which).
Think of it as how much time would you work to earn 500, 1,000, 3,000, 10,000.
On big flat races I split the field into three groups, and give points to each group, 3, 2, 1, most suited, suites, unsuited.
I do that for form, draw, going, distance, and possibly one more.
In a field of 18 runners, six get 3 points for form, six get 2 points, six get one point.
Then I do the same for going, and so on.
Add up the points, sort in order, then concentrate on the horses with the top points.
Is there a horse that gets high points and is also a high price?
Then I spend a lot of time comparing the possibles, looking at other factors.
Surprisingly many betters only look at the form of a few horses in the field. Then they "like" a horse.

sharkey 25 wrote: »

My idea is to spend some more time (probably the evening before) picking some selections. In this regard I wouldn't intend to pay for any online subscriptions so would appreciate advice on the best free resources. I hope to keep the volume of bets reasonable and track how I get on over the next while.

The most important factor is price. Use a betting exchange.
If you do not believe me, spend a week or two not betting, but listing your selections, the results, the bookmaker price and exchange price, the profit for each.

MaxBet

Best advice is don’t take anyone’s advice .

What works for someone else won’t work for you.

Just do your own thing , make sure you enjoy it , paper trade , record absolutely everything , be disciplined and then when you have confidence in your approach , give yourself a betting bank based on your paper trading and start betting no bigger than 1% of your bank .

Record everything .
Be disciplined .
Don’t listen to anyone else ..... if you want to back 3 runners in a class 6 5f sprint at Southwell because you’re confident you can make money at it long term , then do it . Whatever works for you .

Probably most important , if you’re not enjoying the challenge or the betting bank is empty , stop .

famagusta

The Tetrarch wrote:

When you see the word Festival do not bet. These Festivals tend to be festivals for bookmakers, fan fests, and mean odds. I do not follow jumps racing but my guess is Cheltenham is the objective and this meeting is just a filler to keep interest going until the real action in March. You do not need to bet.

Not true at all, enhanced place terms, very competitive pricing, just remember you don't need to bet in every race

The Tetrarch

famagusta wrote: »

Not true at all, enhanced place terms, very competitive pricing, just remember you don't need to bet in every race

I had a look at Cheltenham 2019.
Day 1 over-round average was 124.1%, or decimal odds 4.0 when the real odds are 5.0 (125% over-round), or 3/1 when the real odds are 4/1.

Day 1: 124%, 120%, 132%, 117%, 122%, 131%, 123% ... average 124.1%
Day 2: 124%, 115%, 138%, 131%, 120%, 133%, 121% ... average 126.0%
Day 3: 117%, 138%, 119%, 125%, 136%, 133%, 138% ... average 129.4%
Day 4: 126%, 135%, 130%, 124%, 132%, 131%, 140% ... average 131.1%

Note the changing generosity of the bookmakers day by day (to themselves).
Their margins increased every day, culminating in the 140% over-round in the last race, the "getting out" stakes. :cool:

The Tetrarch

Going into the implications of the over-round margins.

Assume you got to Cheltenham with a hard saved Euro 1,000 and bet on every horse in every race on the four days, staking more on the lower prices and less on the higher prices to equalise your return on every horse i.e. you collect an equal amount whichever horse wins.

Stake Euro 1,000 on day 1, race 1, at the over-round 124% and you collect Euro 806.45 after the race.

At the end of the seven races on Day 1 you have 221.36.
At the end of the seven races on Day 2 you have 44.66.
At the end of the seven races on Day 3 you have 7.42.
At the end of the seven races on Day 4 you have 1.12.

If you were betting on an exchange, assuming 100% is returned to the betters (it is), but you pay 5% commission on winnings.

At the end of the seven races on Day 1 you have 746.22.
At the end of the seven races on Day 2 you have 505.07.
At the end of the seven races on Day 3 you have 358.94.
At the end of the seven races on Day 4 you have 255.09.

Scott Tenorman

The Tetrarch wrote: »

You will hear and read about value betting. After fifty years betting I have no idea how you can tell if a bet is a value bet. Some will say it is value, some will say it isn't. Opinions make the market.

I bet only on the flat, and tend to not be interested in the racing in April and May. The need for action (the desire to bet) is a big problem.
If I buy the Racing Post I will ignore race meeting at the lesser tracks - betting fodder, little difference between the horses, pot luck, they take it in turns to win.
Immediately I look at the races at the big meeting(s) and perhaps have an interest in two out of seven races on a card. I concentrate on these, and may decide to not have a bet (often a very important decision).

When you see the word Festival do not bet. These Festivals tend to be festivals for bookmakers, fan fests, and mean odds.
I do not follow jumps racing but my guess is Cheltenham is the objective and this meeting is just a filler to keep interest going until the real action in March.
You do not need to bet.

I tried this in the 1990s. Too many low class horses.
Ask yourself which is the better betting choice, low class races with small prizemoney (about the size of a moderate winning bet), or high class races with large prizemoney (jumps), or on the flat large prizemoney and breeding value worth millions to the winning owner. You can be certain the horses are trying for the big prizes.
Low value races are races that will be/could be manipulated in betting coups by connections of the horse to cover the cost of buying the horses and training the horse.
You are picking the best horse in the race on form (difficult to know) and then trying to guess the intentions of the connections (impossible to know).

How long do I spend analysing a race?
My first big win was in the 1992 English Derby, 3,500 pounds win, nice money 30 years ago, Dr Devious at 12/1 and 10/1. I had bought Timeform Perspective, loose leaf A4 size, about 400 pages. I spent three nights going through the form of the 19 runner field, about 15 hours. There was a preview on BBC TV of the Derby field. I recorded that and watched it several times. There was an article in The Sporting Life Weekender by Nick Mordin where he used the Dosage Index and form to reduce the possible winners to 5 horses (4 ran). I decided Dr Devious was the bet. Strangely that horse ran in the Kentucky Derby (7th) the previous month, and on his way back was held up in Germany and spent a night in a zoo. Travel abroad by horses was uncommon thirty years ago.

How long did I spend analysing before my win in the 2012 Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe at 75s?
In this case I had recorded the finishing position and draw position of all Arc runners for about 30 years. It was a bit like on a cookery program "this is one I prepared earlier".
I knew my pick was favoured by the draw, and the big danger was drawn badly 18 of 18. The favourite was imo over-raced and likely to be jaded.
And I knew something about the ground that few knew or bothered about. It was heavy (everyone knew) and the soil is clay (few knew the significance).
With many neagtives about the fancied horses I though my pick, 75s on the exchanges, was about a 6/1 chance.
Here I will admit in 2019 I backed the horses that finished last in The English Derby, last in the English Oaks, and last in another big race (thankfully I've forgotten which).
Think of it as how much time would you work to earn 500, 1,000, 3,000, 10,000.
On big flat races I split the field into three groups, and give points to each group, 3, 2, 1, most suited, suites, unsuited.
I do that for form, draw, going, distance, and possibly one more.
In a field of 18 runners, six get 3 points for form, six get 2 points, six get one point.
Then I do the same for going, and so on.
Add up the points, sort in order, then concentrate on the horses with the top points.
Is there a horse that gets high points and is also a high price?
Then I spend a lot of time comparing the possibles, looking at other factors.
Surprisingly many betters only look at the form of a few horses in the field. Then they "like" a horse.

The most important factor is price. Use a betting exchange.
If you do not believe me, spend a week or two not betting, but listing your selections, the results, the bookmaker price and exchange price, the profit for each.

Don’t what’s worse here: the after-timing or the advice!

The Tetrarch

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

Don’t what’s worse here: the after-timing or the advice!

Why hide behind a general comment?
Pick the advice apart, and put up your own advice.

And the wins are not aftertiming. They were posted before the race.

Scott Tenorman

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Why hide behind a general comment?
Pick the advice apart, and put up your own advice.

And the wins are not aftertiming. They were posted before the race.

You posted Dr Devious winning the derby before the race?

The Tetrarch

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

You posted Dr Devious winning the derby before the race?

No I did not. The internet was not around then, and I assume you were not either.
The person asked how much time do people spend analysing a race, and what factors do they consider.
"what type of things do you factor in when picking selections? How long do you honestly spend working to a conclusion?"

My other win mentioned above was recommended at the price on the Betfair forum. Nobody backed it.
I did mention backing horses that finished last in three of the biggest races in 2019. I assume that meets your approval as you did not mention it.

Now, how about putting up your methodology. That is what the OP asked.

The Tetrarch

sharkey 25 wrote: »

All general hints/tips would be appreciated, ive read some threads on here and can see that there are knowledgeable people about. Thanks

He must know Scott Tenorman posts here, and is awaiting his advice.
The least Scott Tenorman can do is tell him to avoid my terrible advice, giving examples.