Ratings2Win Profitable Favourites - Is it possible?
 

There is always a debate that is raging somewhere in the world right now on this topic.

Can you make money from betting favourites?

Most professional punters do just that. And for good reason.

• There is scope to bet decent money across many agencies without affecting the price as much as a decent go would be on a long shot.
• Market reaction or lack off is easier to recognize with the liquidity
• Market is the most correct barometer of horses chances

There are some big negatives as well.

• Once the fave is known the price generally slides
• You have to sit there all day and watch, with races 5 min or even less apart that can be really bad for your kidneys! Once you identify a favorite then you have to execute the bet in all that short time.

One way to improve your chances is to go through all the races and eliminate all the horses that shouldn’t be favourites. That will leave you with a short list that is manageable. You then concentrate on that list.

The answer is that YES it can be done, You will need to run some sort of software or manual method to eliminate those selections that are unsuitable and you should be left with a few good horses every day! Waiting for these pre-selected bets is much easier to manage and bet then just a plain list of all horses.

Of course the issue is; what do you use to qualify the selections? Well, I would say that RATINGS coupled with a few select form filters are your best chances. There is a good reason to use ratings, firstly they qualify the horse’s chance against all others in a race and secondly they are hopefully a little unique and not available to everyone under the sun like the general form is.
Form is important and when used properly can eliminate horses that would otherwise qualify especially for extreme situations. EG horse rising 10kg in weight or something like that, while this may or may not be a factor I would suggest that you research such issues and make your form rules accordingly.

Before I get shouted down, I can offer some proof across several thousand selections over the last 3+ years. And I have attached the spreadsheet to this post. The prices are based on better of NSW/SP.

What’s more we have been giving away the selections for FREE, (some of you already visit for them) live each morning for the last 5 months. I thought that it would be great to post the selections here and see how it goes against the dreaded forum curse for a few months.

So far in the live period of 5 months we have
Selections 419 (just under 3 per DAY)
Strike rate 47.5%
- Profit on turnover +3.34% NSW TOTE ONLY using flat bet with a Maximum bank risk of only 20.5%
- Profit on turnover +6.39% ISP (average closing fixed price available on the internet) using flat bet with a Maximum bank risk of only 18.5%
- Profit on turnover +8.47% NSW/SP using flat bet with a Maximum bank risk of only 16%
- Profit on turnover +11.39% BestTote/SP/ISP using flat bet with a Maximum bank risk of only 16%, (BestTote/SP/ISP is what we consider the best case scenario, this could be achievable for those many that use Betfair and fixed odds and best of best and similar products to improve the return)

For those that want to bet proportional, then a real scenario is $5000 bank, 4% takeout, profit $4136 or 7.56% POT just at NSW/SP with Maximum bank risk at 27%. Nice and safe!

So is it possible? Here you have it, it seems it’s not only possible; it’s sustainable and above all REALISTIC with not only the possible bet size you can have but more importantly based on a solid sample of several thousand selections!


These Selections were created with Ratings2Win Axis software using a single system.

To use these selections only bet when they are SP favourite and if the tracks are Good or Dead. If you use other then SP to determine the favourite then your results may vary but should be about the same in the long run!

R2W FREE SELECTIONS
(Best results - Only G/D tracks + Selections are SP fave.)

26/05/2013 - R2W PROFIT FAVE DRY
13:00 STRAT 2 1 Finniss Power
13:05 CRANB 5 4 Koritsi Mou
13:45 DEVS 4 2 Vedo
14:10 STRAT 4 8 Terrapinna
16:28 CASTE 8 1 Emdee

2 tremendous posts Michal. Thank you for these.

Cheers LG

great post. This forum is starting to come back alive with some really good information.

Quick Note
 

I should have noted that the spreadsheet contains in excess of 2600 selections with a winning strike rate of 46.4% and POT of 4.56% based on NSW/SP.

Just like to make an observation & I am not offering an opinion on the above one way or another -

The first & foremost issue I consider when deciding on an punting approach is whether or not it is profitable over time, & while the results detailed in the spreadsheet do show a profit, they also show a break even period of about 2 years, chart attached.

Was there a profit, am i missing something, personally i would avoid top favourites the POT just isn't high enough unless you are your turnover is much higher that the average punter.

Stugots,

Thanks for the graph and your comments.

Kiwi, all 4 years in the sample show profit, but as Stugots pointed out the middle 2 were thin.
2010 11.80%
2011 0.38%,
2012 1.81%
2013 8.5% (With May nearly over those figures are also out of date (we update once at the end of the month)

A couple of things are worth a mention in regards to Stugots comment;

• If someone started using the system at any time during it’s test they would have never gone astray or even close, that by itself is quite a positive factor. The end is always in profit from where ever you would have started!

• The divs used are easily improved upon, so a reasonable POT could have been easily achieved above that which is shown by someone using just a little initiative.

• The system is a bulk method, there are many sub-systems that could be produced from it that would have greatly improved the performance (46.4% is a fantastic starting point!!!) It’s not something that we want to do but the option is certainly there.

Something else that is also worth commenting on; for us at R2W punting is about a long term successful venture, the reality is that wins come in spits and spats and not in a form of a weekly scheduled income.

I realise that this statement will bring a foray of those that make regular money and all that. The issue is perception vs reality. The reality is that there will always be variance which means that NO-ONE makes a steady weekly income from punting that is always the same. They make income and win but if it’s to be properly examined you will find that they win but not in a steady stream. I’m not saying it’s not possible as anything is possible in this game but for us the mere mortals the reality is, that variance in the results means you’ll get good-and-bad weeks, months and even years!

The truth is that most punters are unable or unwilling to accept variance or just plain don’t even know what result variance is and how to measure it. People still think that their system/method has a mathematical dispensation and variance doesn’t apply to them, that is, until they run smack into it! However they will usually call this event bad luck or forum curse or the punting gods being against them and move on without learning a thing. Things like results variance, bank risk and their threshold and good bank management. The sad fact is that their testing and research usually involves a few dozen to a few hundred selections which is way too small a sample and then they wonder why their system/method fails.

That brings me to a point, how many punters would have started with this system and discarded it as a no good thing? Unfortunately judging from the many posts on many forums majority of those that try to make a profit from the punt would have been on to the ‘next best thing’ the moment that the results would have became uncomfortable. How many have thrown out the ‘grail’ they are searching for because they can’t discipline themselves and apply the most important factor to their punting ; CONSISTENCY! Actually, that is not quite true, they are consistently inconsistent.

Hopefully what you’ll learn from our contributions to this forum is not only that we have a great range of products but that we are realistic and transparent in what and how we present our results across everything that we do. Something that this industry is NOT known for! This includes a realistic approach to punting which is based on proven, professional and factual findings.

Too true Michal.

Agree with most of what you say Michal - 'consistency' is one of the many keys required to squeeze a $ out of this game.

Some really nice results

The interesting thing is if someone where to have started using this system around Jan 2011 through to Aug 2012 you would have a sufficient loss if I read correctly. How does one continue with a run of outs with any confidence it will swing upwards again?

I'm always curious Michal on what methods you might use to check the viability of a system. You are correct with the market price being the best indication of the true chances of a horse. With slight altercations you can make profit with a lot of work.

A major problem I found with many ratings assessed against large pools in Metro races is they often show limited advantages (rated price vs market price). Then you have smaller pools with some value but harder to assess races due to limited form of horses.

This is where I find the best to be a combination of smaller pools but races with horses of a min 5 starts of more.

Keep up the good informative posts

Significant loss is a subjective opinion Vortech but it’s a great point to bring up. I think that it largely depends on the expectation of the user. The sad situation is that most punters have rose-coloured glasses and are not at all prepared for the reality that sets in. Especially when punters realities are inflated by small sample (boutique) systems that are sold or produced which create unrealistic expectations. We can advise and teach, which is what we do for the benefit of our clients, but at the end, if one is serious about profits and success then one must realise that this is a long term game, always has been.

Just like the stock market, whose returns long term have been solid, would have seen someone that started just before the GFC still licking their wounds today, and someone that bought after and experienced only the recovery must be thinking that this is the easiest money ever. Both of these oposing results are NOT indicative of the long-term performance.

Perseverance, and the lack there of, is one of the reasons that most don’t succeed. You only have to look at the number of posts each month that brings something ‘new and exciting’ to the forum, generally based on a small sample size, to have it disappear and replaced next month by something ‘new and exciting’. In fact it was you, Vortech that did the work of collecting a huge load of systems here, how many good ideas laid abandoned in that lot?

Let’s address that loss:
If someone bet using this system over the period that Vortech quoted using the odds that we show (which are conservative) then the POT is still only -1.53%.

• Take a scenario of 10,000 bank and a 1% investment using our odds (NSW/SP) POT -1.53%, Profit - $2,005.00, Highest bank risk 40%

• Take a scenario of 10,000 bank and a 1% investment using better of BT/SP/ISP POT 1.40%, Profit $1,837.00, Highest bank risk 25%

The above profit was achieved using BT/SP/ISP which is comparable to likes of Best of Best, Betfair prices or fixed price shopping, in other words a dividend achievable with a little initiative. In fact the difference between the loss and win scenarios was as a result of a simple 10c improvement on the average win dividend.

Im going to go out on a limb, and say that the term ‘significant loss’ was only a figure of speech, or based on just a glance over the results. And that is perfectly OK; because Vortech is probably right or not far, from what a mediocre user of the system might have been thinking around this time, regardless of the REAL RESULTS or the results that could be achieved with price initiative. As you probably well know, most people don’t keep accurate results so most punters perception would be that this is going nowhere!

Reasons to persevere
That’s a great topic of a new thread by itself Vortech, I would like to know what others make their decisions on, there is always something new to learn, but to answer your question;

• System is Not under-pined by a single or a few large winners,
• System has a Bank risk threshold within realistic norm
• Large sample in the results over time
• System is based on just one major idea (ratings based) + horse being SP1 and a few others which have insignificant bearing on the results to trim the extremes in weight and distance rises and so on.
• System is partly based on the best long-term predictor of winners – the market. Isolating those that should be favourites and betting them when they are is a great way that one can utilise favourites to make profit.
• We check and correct all the errors we find for all tab meetings in terms of: race times, distances, track conditions, in-running positions, finishing margins and others, there are dozens of errors each day. So I have confidence in the ratings produced. I know this sounds like a sales pitch, but you ask what would propel me to continue, confidence in the ratings with rock solid performance over long-term, created by my program, would be a major factor personally.
• The above also addresses the issues that you raised, this system is for all races Metro, Prov, Country or Rural tracks, and concentrating on favourites ensures that the prices and profits remain REAL.

I do have to agree with you, that it is easier to find value in the non metro circuit for someone whose bet size is reasonable, in my opinion it’s simply for the reason that the big mathematical/computerised syndicates can’t be bothered to operate there due to pool sizes and a smaller punter can take advantage of the corporate bookmaker prices. However with the ever improving computer knowledge and usage of the mainstream punters, this is also shrinking.

At the end let me just finish with this, creating this system was not a hard work at all, in-fact there were a few systems I could have gone with that produced similar results and sample size. Something that is echoed by our client, with R2W Axis the edge is just easier to find.

Thnks Michal.

Michal
You may be interested in an exercise I did with your SRSS results for May. By using the much neglected exacta bet type I increased your profit for the month by 170%. I used VICTAB prices to select the second exacta leg in each case. Your second and third rated horses in each race probably would produce an even better result but I don't have access to those.
I have changed a column heading in the attached s/sheet to Ëxacta and showed a comparison with your win prices.
All the best
Speedy

Hi SpeedyBen

Thank you for your innovative post. So as to explain the strategy that is used to bet the SRA selections contained in the spreadsheet you attached to your post, we do not bet or recommend betting at level stakes. All recommendations made to clients are staked in proportion to our r2w$ value assessment to collect 4% of your bank.

You are correct in identifying the additional value that exists in exotic pools however the way in which we go about that is a matter probably best discussed in a separate thread.

If you require anything specific that we might be able to provide, we would be more than happy to assist.

Michal, do you by some chance have the place dividends for the previous data set you attached, using the same format?


Cheers LG

LG,

The system printout is specific for our display purposes, which is to show win only. The place portion uses NSW tab because there are no SP place divs. It shows a loss of 1.41% POT if that is what you are asking.

Michal

HI Michal, just to clarify.. are you able to source the individual NSW Place dividends which equate to the overall loss of 1.41% and list them to the RHS of the WinDiv field? It would help me assess the usefulness of your good results here with regards my own systems, strategies i.e. as a base/bulk method = starting point



Cheers LG

LG,

Yes I am able to to do that, in-fact Axis has the ability to use any of the 3 totes as the div, plus Best tote and middle tote for anyone wanting to match their betting activity against obtainable corporate products.

You can contact us through Ozmium and I will then email you the printout when Im doing the end of month consolidation. We are more then happy to help those that genuinely want to consider Axis, its features and how it can best fit in with their betting methods and budget.

It should be noted, that we offer these Free system selections to showcase the programs ability, the actual systems showcased will be replaced with a new one from time to time in order to be fair to those that have actually purchased our product.

Michal

Thanks Michal. All understood, will do.

Cheers LG

Do you take into consideration the starting price vs your rated price?

Hi Vortech

The results are based on the best of SP (official starting price) and NSW tote. FYI, tests have shown that top fluctuation would deliver an additional 4-5% increase in POT.

Ok - What I was trying to see is if over time the starting price or avg dividend dropped by 50c this would affect the long-term profitability of the system.

If long-term your system is showing around 45% strike rate and many of horses in the future are priced $1.50 (underlay) as most ratings people say, would you consider only those over the assessed price?

Hi Vortech

You raise a valid question however it would be almost impossible mathematically for the current average dividend which stands at $2.25 (5/3/10 to 28/5/13 - 2,742 sample size) and a long term strike rate which is currently 46.4% to move downward towards an average dividend of $1.75 (50c drop) without the propensity for the strike rate to move upwards to around 60% and in doing so maintain the same POT of 4.61%.

As stated in my last post, it is more than feasible to expect that you can improve the average dividend to around $2.34-$2.36 by obtaining top fluctuation. Of course having the ability to generate these or other potential system qualifiers well in advance of the race is a significant asset.

Hope that helps.

I would be interested to hear your thoughts on how it is deterimined to be mathematically impossible - even in a separate thread.

Is this determined by proportional betting tests, sample size or winners

Hi Vortech

It is not determined by proportional betting tests, sample size or winners, but rather the fact that Australian horse racing in particular demonstrates and has done so for decades, a strong Favorite Long-shot Bias. This means that horses (in particular at the shorter end of the market) at the dividends that we are talking about win almost nearly as often as their probability implies. So $1.75 chances win around 55% of races v their implied 57% probability, whereas $4.00 chances win only ~20% of races contested which in turn implies true odds of $5.00. As the dividend on offer increases, the bias against them magnifies even further.

I am interested to understand though why you think it might be possible that true $2.15 chances (consistent with the sample and strike rate) might suddenly be less effective to the point where their odds on offer at starting price might skew to the point that implies their chance of winning was more like a $2.82 chance.

End of Month Summary
 

Due to the wet weather in May there were less then the usual number of selections. Average 2 per day.

The performance was:

WIN - Bets 67 winners 30 strike rate 44.8% POT 2.99% POSITIVE OUTCOME (NSW/SP)
PLC - Bets 67 winners 54 strike rate 80.1% POT 6.30% POSITIVE OUTCOME (NSW TOTE)

These selections are generated by our R2W Axis program from a single system.

Whole Period Mar 2010 to May 2013
 

'PROFITABLE FAVOURITES' SYSTEM SELECTIONS (Long-Term Results)

Results:
Cumulative Number of Bets - 2,748
(2 per day on average)
Strike Rate - 46.4%
Positive POT 4.63% (best of NSW/SP).
See the results file updated monthly to May 2013. (attached)

Details: These selections only become bets if they are SP favourite and are on either Good & Dead tracks. Expect 2 selections per day on average. Uses several of our best performing ratings and settings as filters.

Please note: In accordance with normal statistical variance (even with such a great strike rate) there has still been 10 losers in a row contained within the sample number). See our 'Learning to bet like a Pro' articles for a better understanding on this topic.

If you disregard the SP favourite rule, the system will have 4221 selections. A strike rate of 37% and close to a break even result (-1.3% POT at best of NSW/SP). If you have the ability to obtain better prices such as top fluctuation or better, you would be in profit using this strategy.

These results are created by our R2W Axis program from a single system, these selections are offered free to showcase the capabilities of the program and its rating and not to sell this system. It will be replaced with a new one from time to time. If you would like to know more then don't hesitate to contact us.

Michal - I'm very interested in your findings.

I understand you only look for favourites on Good/Dead tracks.
Any other prime filters
I've running some tests using your ideas from 1999 to 2006. Trying to get approximately 5000 selections together.

I'll let you know how I go and if there is any reflections to your approach.

Hi Vortech,

I think that I stated previously in this thread, the main rule is based on rating consensus. That is the prime filter. There are few others that really eliminate the extremes and other then the Good/Dead track have no real bearing overall on the outcome. We might be talking about less then a hundred or so selections eliminated all together, so just a few percent.

In regards to the missing wet portion of the system; we use the same method for Slow and Heavy tracks. It still produces 700 selections for a 42.5% win SR and a positive POT if you can obtain a better price then the NSW/SP that we use. At NSW/SP it looses 2.21%.

What I have done with it, is applied one additional filter to make it into a great little system. That one rule is painfully obvious for a wet track system.

It just makes sense, when a horse is running on a wet track and he cops a hoof full of mud in his face, he isn't going to be too excited about continuing to run and what if he cops a few more? What about the sliding and interference .... I think I made my point. There is one horse that is pretty much immune to the mud slinging and interfearance at least.

The FRONT RUNNER !

Take any system that is failing in the wet, and only apply it to the front runners and you are more then likely have a winner providing that you have a logical method to begin with. At least that is what I find in Axis. But how do you find the front runner? What you need is an accurate and consistent way of measuring this and you are set.

Our R2W Axis has a few advantages over the standard form guide based in-running and one MAJOR difference.

• We have the in-running positions for every TAB meeting in Australia so each horse and his past 20 starts has at least the settling position. So when we calculate our predicted in-running and our speed maps we are not relying on half completed data that the rest of Australian punters use.

• The leader is not necessarily the horse that leads all the time. When we calculate horses PIR (position in running) it will vary from race to race, and while others look and can recognize the obvious leaders we have the ability to calculate who is likely to lead even if the field is full of back-markers!

• Our PIR also creates speed maps that show horses initial likely velocity, in conjunction to his rail position and the rest of the field, so in a glance you can recognize who has the advantage and why a good leader in the outside gates is often undervalued by the market.

Anyway so applying our PIR (position in running) rank of one, and eliminating all the horses that are likely to cop mud in their face and interference on wet conditions we are able to produce a system with 48% SR and 9% POT. Applying the same to our already successful Dry favourite system increases the strike rate to 49.7% and 8.33% POT using our conservative NSW/SP divs.

You notice the correlation between the 2 systems is almost the same when taking this PIR into consideration, giving me confidence that the results are due to a pattern rather then a coincidence. In-fact I could combine them back together for a front running Favourite system and great success.

Unfortunately using last start settling position for instance, which is what most punters have, has absolutely no such results, and that is even with our complete settling position data.


Kind regards

Its definitely a good product and one most should be interested in especially for taking that next step in their punting careers.

The challenge is to convince those that 50+ POT are not possible in this game long-term.

With the tools I have I'm not able to successfully generate results like yours. Not even close.

I would be interested in your product only time permits. Working full time as a certified Accountant coming up to end of financial year doesn't allow much time to even see if specific horses are the starting favourites yet along watch the races live.

Keep up the good work. You appear honest and genuine.

A nice result yesterday!

2 from 2 and $1.9 and $5.10 for SP favourites.



I have included the Wet system selection for today for extra interest and will do so from now on as the tracks are getting rain effected too much which reduces the selections in the Dry Fave system. So please disregard the G/D Tracks recomendation for the wet system and only confirm the selection is favourite.

If you want to know what the Wet Fave system is please read post 37

Finally, thanks Vortech, appreciate the comments, we have been getting a lot of positive feedback of late.

The wet system, for rain effected tracks has far less selections, it is harder to find these standouts on the less occurring wet tracks; as a result I only put it up as a matter of interest. If you are following these selections, please note the system names and ensure that you are following the right recommendations for best results before you commit to your bet.

R2W PROFIT FAVE DRY - Best results with G/D tracks and SP favourite
R2W PROFIT FAVE WET - Best results with SP favourite