Identifying over-hyped and overbet horses
Dave McAuley
I can't believe that Alhoosam returned at 9/4 in the 2:00 at Newbury
today. The Pricewise selection was also given a strong mention by the
Spotlight column and by the Channel 4 Moaning Line team as well as being
tipped by Templegate in the popular tabloid The Sun. Surely this must
have been mug money that forced the price down from a best available
7/1. The horse was out of form and although this was a fairly average
'B' class handicap, the level of form he had achieved in the past didnt
justify him being favourite at all. It was possible to back at least 3
of the main dangers in the race to return a profit but what I want to
know is, when exactly does a horse become a hype horse ? It would be
interesting to keep a record of which horse's start substantially
shorter than their forecast SP and exactly what hype in the press
affected the price. The obvious one is Pricewise but it would be
interesting to see just how the Spotlight mentions fare in the betting.
I think it may be a good idea to allocate out Tipsters from the Post,
perhaps the Weekender & Raceform and maybe other tabloids to ng members
to analyse for a while. To get the ball rolling, I'll keep a close check
on the Spotlight selections and mentions in the 'verdict' column for
every flat race today and I've listed the other's below...feel free to
stick you name next to whichever tipster's horse's you fancy recording
or to follow any other 'tipsters' not mentioned below, perhaps the
Morning Line team's Charity bet...does anyone have a note of their
selections from this morning ?
Spotlight (Flat) - me
Spotlight (Jumps) -
Pricewise -
Nick Fox -
Ten Year Trends -
Gerald Delamere (Positives, selections and dangers) -
Newmarket -
The North -
Lambourn -
The South -
Topspeed -
Postdata -
Obviously some of these are going to be more time consuming than most so
I suggest we restrict it to racing on a Saturday, satrting from today,
perhaps also for any other televised races during the week. Should be
interesting to take a look at just for a month even. Suggestions for the
information we record are welcome but initially I think all we need is
the tipster, type of race, course, selection, strength of selection
(nap, nb etc), runners in the race, forecast RP SP, opening price,
returned SP and result. What does everyone think and is there anyway
anything like this can be research in RSB for any of the popular
tipsters ?
--
Dave McAuley
fergus crowther
price up the race themselves and on many occasions IMO shorten up the horse
they are tipping, as would be expected.
Neil
Stan Moffat
clear that it would not win. Steamers hardly ever win. Every horse that
McCririck screams about on the morning line as being gambled almost
inevitably loses. You then have to work out why these so called hot pots
get beat. Is it that the tipsters are crap or are some of them in the
bookies pockets, tipping horses that cant win or do the bookies make sure
the steamers get beat?
As for the telephone tipsters - Peter Sandrovitch and Willie McFarland had
reasonable days. McFarlaND HAD BEAUCHAMP kING WHICH I BACKED EACH WAY,
(LAST IN THE LINCOLN), AMBLESIDE (SECOND 3/1) ROADRACER (WON 5/1) AND SPECS
(WON 7/4). Sandrovitch had Star od Dungannon (non runner) Lawahik (won 4/6),
present laughter (won 1/2), Crocadee (won 8/11)
Stan Stallion
Nick Willis
nick willis
Stan Moffat wrote in message <36fd2...@shiva.ukisp.net>...
Dave McAuley
<mof...@FreeNet.co.uk> writes
>Sandrovitch had Star od Dungannon (non runner) Lawahik (won 4/6),
>present laughter (won 1/2), Crocadee (won 8/11)
You call this a reasonable day ? If I was subscribing to his 'service',
I'd be most disappointed to be tipped a 1/2 shot.
--
Dave McAuley
ai...@dial.pipex.com
<ni...@kokotoni.enta.net> wrote:
Sandrovitch's normal bets are pretty awful. I collate his "maximum"
bets, for amusement because his running score in his Racing Post ads,
e.g. "P.S. goes for 39th maximum today" tells its own story. Watch how
long they stay at that number. It's been so poor lately that he's
dropped this line of advertising.
For info, since 18 Nov he's given 8 winners from 18 maximums. Of the 8
that won, the average winning price has been 0.69, before tax.
hehe
>sandrovitch always backs outsiders then!
>
>nick willis
>
>Stan Moffat wrote in message <36fd2...@shiva.ukisp.net>...
>>I bet Alhosan today but it fell from 7/1 in the morning and it then became
>>clear that it would not win. Steamers hardly ever win. Every horse that
>>McCririck screams about on the morning line as being gambled almost
>>inevitably loses. You then have to work out why these so called hot pots
>>get beat. Is it that the tipsters are crap or are some of them in the
>>bookies pockets, tipping horses that cant win or do the bookies make sure
>>the steamers get beat?
>>As for the telephone tipsters - Peter Sandrovitch and Willie McFarland had
>>reasonable days. McFarlaND HAD BEAUCHAMP kING WHICH I BACKED EACH WAY,
>>(LAST IN THE LINCOLN), AMBLESIDE (SECOND 3/1) ROADRACER (WON 5/1) AND SPECS
>>(WON 7/4). Sandrovitch had Star od Dungannon (non runner) Lawahik (won
>4/6),
>>present laughter (won 1/2), Crocadee (won 8/11)
>>Stan Stallion
>>
>>
>
>
cliffevans
>
>In article <36fd2...@shiva.ukisp.net>, Stan Moffat
><mof...@FreeNet.co.uk> writes
>>present laughter (won 1/2), Crocadee (won 8/11)
>
>I'd be most disappointed to be tipped a 1/2 shot.
However this one example shows you the best example of an overbet horse
namely the 'getting out' stakes where favourite backers who have had a
poor day lump on the obvious last race favourite and the bookie chappies
are ready for them
Cliff Evans
Simon McInnes
non-runners on the day, and I think that the tipsters went in search of
horses that would act on fast ground. I did the same quite successfully
at Newbury, but was wrong in this particular race as I backed New Inn.
In terms of overhyped horse, being a Pricewise selection makes a horse
drop in price (even though their highlight price might be from a
regional bookie that few can get on with). I am told that the main
tipsters blow hot and cold (Winning Line, Henry Rix, Isiris, Sandrovitch
etc.) and during their good spells, their tips would attract significant
money. Personally, I think anyone who backs a horse on the
recommendation of McCririck or Thompson must be a halfwit of the first
order.
cheers
Simon
Lester
He always tips short priced favourites so clearly doesn't have any inside
knowledge or workable system.
LAKE KARIBA was tipped as a Double Maximum (last seen at Burger King)
about a month ago. Regular punters know all about this monkey of a horse.
He was very short in the betting, (Sandrovitch's influence ? ) and finished
well back in the field.
I read somewhere about Sandrovitch's experience with bookmaking.
Clearly, he is WORKING for them !
Lester
Hugh Taylor
Dave McAuley wrote in message ...
It would be
>interesting to keep a record of which horse's start substantially
>shorter than their forecast SP and exactly what hype in the press
>affected the price. The obvious one is Pricewise but it would be
>interesting to see just how the Spotlight mentions fare in the betting.
I think the demise of the Life hasn't helped the "hype horse" situation.At
least when the SL shared the market with the RP,for every punter being
influenced by Pricewise/Spotlight/Diomed (or equivalent) there was another
punter relying on Beat The Book/Man On The Spot/Augur or whatever.Nowadays
there only seem to be two or three real spheres of influence -
Pricewise,Nick Fox and Spotlight.I don't believe the other tipsters in the
Post would have that much effect - it's noticeable that Postmark,Topspeed
and Postdata all tipped Heart,but these three columns are nowhere near as
"high profile" as the other three.
I also think that many punters who might have been quietly
contemplating a bet on horses such as Alhoosam allow themselves (foolishly)
to have their minds made up for them by the fear that they might miss the
price-there's a definite craze for "second guessing" steamers,I know 'cos
I've fallen into that trap myself on occasions.It's not inconceivable,
too,that one or two shrewd operators have worked out that if they can get on
at the top price on a guaranteed Saturday steamer,they can then wait a
couple of hours and take advantage by selling the same horse in a spread
betting 50 index-I don't know if Alhoosam was quoted in such an index on
Saturday but if he was the price would have had to reflect at least some of
the market move to deter too many buyers.
Personally,I think Pricewise was one of the worst things to ever
happen for clued-up punters.I know that might sound crazy,and don't get me
wrong,the quality of the tipping in the early days of Pricewise was
superb,but it was already possible for anyone with half a brain to identify
best-priced horses from Teletext and adverts in the papers,without the
attendant hype and consequent short-lived nature of the prices
recommended.Pricewise was a brilliant innovation,to be sure,but I sometimes
wonder nowadays whether it serves the bookmakers (as an early-warning
system) more than the punters.
Hugh Taylor
Colin Houlihan
>I think the demise of the Life hasn't helped the "hype horse" situation.At
>least when the SL shared the market with the RP,for every punter being
>influenced by Pricewise/Spotlight/Diomed (or equivalent) there was another
>punter relying on Beat The Book/Man On The Spot/Augur or whatever.Nowadays
>there only seem to be two or three real spheres of influence -
>Pricewise,Nick Fox and Spotlight.I don't believe the other tipsters in the
>Post would have that much effect - it's noticeable that Postmark,Topspeed
>and Postdata all tipped Heart,but these three columns are nowhere near as
>"high profile" as the other three.
True, with no competition the headline tips of the Post are very
influential on the betting markets, especially as it seems more common
these days for the main tipsters to select the same horse. Sometimes
when reading the Post I get the feeling the tipsters all have a little
meeting to discuss the best prospect for the next day and then go for
the same horse in the main race (mainly Nick Fox, Pricewise and
Spotlight) so on a casual glance it can appear that they'll all latched
on to a "good thing", which would be interesting if it were a few
knowledgeable people individually arriving at the same conclusion but I
doubt it is.
> I also think that many punters who might have been quietly
>contemplating a bet on horses such as Alhoosam allow themselves (foolishly)
>to have their minds made up for them by the fear that they might miss the
>price-there's a definite craze for "second guessing" steamers,I know 'cos
>I've fallen into that trap myself on occasions.It's not inconceivable,
>too,that one or two shrewd operators have worked out that if they can get on
>at the top price on a guaranteed Saturday steamer,they can then wait a
>couple of hours and take advantage by selling the same horse in a spread
>betting 50 index-I don't know if Alhoosam was quoted in such an index on
>Saturday but if he was the price would have had to reflect at least some of
>the market move to deter too many buyers.
I've never really tried the fixed odds against spread bets arbitrage as
the spreads are all effectively e/w bets, but now you mention it I will
have to investigate further.....
> Personally,I think Pricewise was one of the worst things to ever
>happen for clued-up punters.I know that might sound crazy,and don't get me
>wrong,the quality of the tipping in the early days of Pricewise was
>superb,but it was already possible for anyone with half a brain to identify
>best-priced horses from Teletext and adverts in the papers,without the
>attendant hype and consequent short-lived nature of the prices
>recommended.Pricewise was a brilliant innovation,to be sure,but I sometimes
>wonder nowadays whether it serves the bookmakers (as an early-warning
>system) more than the punters.
It can be extremely irritating to work on a race for hours and spot a
horse that you think is vastly overpriced only for the Post to headline
the same horse - you know that if you call more than 2 minutes after the
offices open you'll miss the price. Despite it's drawbacks I still like
Pricewise, and if they tip a horse think cannot win at least you know
that the price will shorten hopefully creating more value elsewhere.
--
Colin Houlihan
David Heaton
For four years I have been doing my own speed figures (flat 2yo only) and
although confident in my own figures I always compare them with others to
see if I have made an obvious mistake.
One of the ratings I use for comparison is Topspeed from the R.P. and
because this years Brocklesby race was littered with minefields for speed
rating compilers (see previous newsgroup posts) I looked at the Topspeed
figures for guidance.Then I hit a problem.
Since I know the formula used by Topspeed I have always been able to see how
his ratings have been calculated,and compare the various elements with my
own.
Since most newsgroup speedsters seem to be using the Mordin method I will
explain the main differences between Mordin and Topspeed.
1) Topspeed ratings are based on 1 point = 1 pound weight.
2) Topspeed ratings allow for weight carried.
3) Topspeed ratings are Weight For Age adjusted.
The problem I have is with item 3 (W.F.A.) where Topspeed seems to have
changed tack.(sorry for awful pun)
I can show this by comparing the last two Brockesby races.
In 1998 the race was won by Charlene Lacy (Ire),Topspeeds calculations were
based on the following.
Winning time:5.11 secs slow
Going Allowance:-0.38
Weight carried:8st 3lbs
Distance beaten:0 (ie Carlene Lacy won)
Topspeed rated Charlene Lacy 72.
When applying the Topspeed formula on the above data we arrive at a rating
of 25,Topspeed then adds a the official WFA figure of 47 to arrive at his
final rating of 72.
Lets now look at the 1999 Brocklesby:-and second placed Lord Bankes.
Winning time:0.95 secs slow
Going Allowance:00.00
Weight carried:8st 11lbs
Distance beaten:1.1/4 lengths.
Topspeed rated Lord Bankes. 74
When applying the Topspeed formula on the above data we arrive at a rating
of 74,if Topspeed added the official WFA figure of 47,Lord Bankes would have
a massive Topspeed rating of 121.
However Topspeed didn`t add WFA this year,WHY?
OK,OK.,if he had added WFA he would have over-rated the race,but my concern
is this.
Is Topspeed manipulating the going allowances,to arrive at a pre-conceived
rating and if so are they really speed figures at all?
Alternatively,since I haven`t been reading the R.P. from January to late
March (no 2yo
racing):--------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Come on you newsgroup speedsters,tell me if I have missed something.
Regards
2timer
fi...@webinbox.com
<dmhe...@eatyluggs.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>Topspeed rated Lord Bankes. 74
>When applying the Topspeed formula on the above data we arrive at a rating
>of 74,if Topspeed added the official WFA figure of 47,Lord Bankes would have
>a massive Topspeed rating of 121.
According to S.L. Weekender, they had a Going Correction of 0.35 sec
per furlong!
Cheers
azdk
Bigtone53
>per furlong!
>
topspeeds but Dave Edwards'. Just as standard times vary according to the
compilers definition, so do going allowances, so they are rarely directly
comparable.
I think that the answer to dmheaton's original question lies in the article by
Topspeed in the RP this wek. Not only has he 'improved' his earlier formula,
but he now includes adjustments for a missed break and running wide. Until he
explains his new formula in more detail (dont hold your breath!), it will be
difficult to compare this year with last.
TonyW