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.

__________________
Regards


Paul Daily - Ratings2Win Pty Ltd (Director)
R2W Axis - Axis is Australia's leading horse racing software and database; with sophisticated form analysis tools and accurate performance ratings that include Hong Kong.
http://www.ratings2win.com.au/