Remember above all else I come from a non form studying stance and as such know zip about any individual horse, but I do live off my betting returns and have never aspired to own a mansion or a Merc.

I believe the term value should not be applied to a horses chance of winning a race because there are too many factors involved in which horse wins the race. Trying to assess the probability is over estimating one's ability.....BUT, if you assess the value in relation to the system you are using or the SR you historically achieve, then value takes on an all important roll! In fact THE ONLY important consideration.

In other words the value must be positive in relation to your SR. (ability)

__________________
"Not winning on a horse that came first is one thing.....Losing on a horse that didn't come first is something else entirely!!!"

Two bets,

I disagree as you will find those horses which are undervalued will make up a bulk of the strike rate for a system. For example lets take a hypothetical 10 bets.

Bet 1 $2 WIN
Bet 2 $5 LOSS
Bet 3 $5 LOSS
Bet 4 $5 LOSS
Bet 5 $5 LOSS
Bet 6 $2 WIN
Bet 7 $2 WIN
Bet 8 $5 LOSS
Bet 9 $5 LOSS
Bet 10 $5 LOSS

This system selections have a 30% strike rate ... So anything above $3.30 shouold produce a profit ... but the thing is only those bets under $3 are actual winners.

I know this is hypothetical so I ran an actual ratings (unitab rating) to see what happens ie Top 100 raters on unitab)

Without any filters:
35360 Selections
Strike Rate : 23%
WIN ROT = 86%

So assuming this anything over say $4.50 should be a long term winning system :

15393 Selections
Strike Rate : 12%
WIN ROT = 83%

The system has got worse .... So lets say we really need value and should be taking double the chance so $9 +

4442 Selections
Strike Rate : 7%
WIN ROT = 85%

I think this demonstrates my point .... As the odds increase the probability of a seleciton winning decreases. Therefore if you do not know the "true" chance of a horse you are not getting value.

Good Luck.

Twobets, yes you're right but it's not just the S/R that you need to consider. You need to know the sum of the winning chances of all your selections too. Touched on this in post #20.

__________________
Pixie

"It's worth remembering that profit isn't profit until it's spent off the racecourse." -- Crash

Hi Wes,
As usual I'm so thick I don't follow your drift. Surely in your example you are a punter with a 30% SR so by my standards you woulnd't be betting on those $2 gg's. ??? In other words you've got seven out of seven losing bets which don't sound like a winning system whatever value you're getting!!

__________________
"Not winning on a horse that came first is one thing.....Losing on a horse that didn't come first is something else entirely!!!"

Which brings us back to a very sobering thought, Wes, you have such a professional way of saying it, but basically yes, the lower the price the higher the S/R , REGARDLESS of where the selections come from. One step further, 45% of even money chances win REGARDLESS of where or who top rates em', etc etc etc i.e. about 21% of 3-1 chances win etc etc etc, REGARDLESS who considers them value and who doesn't, the end result after thousands of spins = "amazingly" a LOT of about 15-18%, sounds pretty close to the take out to me eh? (Bookies/Tote that is)

partypooper,

thats right .... so unless you can come up with a different set of probabilties to the market you are always going to revert back to the LOT of 15% which is the takeout.

But for those who understand this you can make money both backing and layng selections using a combination of sources for placing your bets.

TwoBets,

Look at the second example which uses actual ratings. You will see the strike rate diminishes as the Price increases which in turn means you need to find higher prices horses to get value which further decreases the strike rate which means finding higher price horses, and so on and so on. A system selection needs to be evaluated on its chance in the race compared to the other horses, not to the strike rate of the system.

There is a big difference to a horse rated top in a 6 horse field to a horse rated top in a 20 horse field. If you used the system strike rate you would assume the same odds for value regardless of field size. Hope that explains it a bit clearer.

Good Luck.

Yes Wes I totally understand the point about SR v's dividends and that is exactly why I'm saying your value judgement should relate to ones own SR.

This is simply an extension of the value arguement . If as I'm suggesting your system can support wins at a certain price, then anything over that price will give you a profit; regardless of how poor value a horse might look in any particular race.

This is the hub of long term bank building value, not whether one should bet on a particular neddy in a particular race.

__________________
"Not winning on a horse that came first is one thing.....Losing on a horse that didn't come first is something else entirely!!!"

What it demonstrates Wesnip, is that the percentage takeout of that tote is 15%.
They return 85% when your selections are blindly picked.
Strike rate must always be looked at in association with the profit on turnover.
If profit on turnover is negative, then the system must lose without some sort of special staking technique.
And even then I'm not sure if it can win.

It's becoming circular.

My own formula goes like this Ratings = Class = Value

If my top rated horse "must" win the race,it is the "class" horse and therefore the "value" horse

If my two,three,four,top rated horses are "must" winners then the "class" factor is too close and there is no "value"

This method tends to take me into country racing as the "class" horse in a race has a tendancy to stand out ,whereas metroplitan races have far too many "class" horses.

Not to labour a point,but by"class" I mean the best horse in that particular race.Not champions "class".

As I mentioned earlier "class" does not come from one rating,but a consensus of ratings over a reasonable time frame.

It can be a bit of a plod at times,but I gave away chasing long shots many moons ago.

The input into this thread is giving me plenty of food for thought,and I thank the forum members for their opinions and expertise.

This concept of Ratings=Class=Value is the only way I have been able to produce consitant profit which is the only type of profit my low stress attitude can handle.

There are downsides to looking for that standout classy nag, which include for me a).not too many bets availalble and b). I often end up on the favourite. The big upside is an extremely high SR and therefore the ability to take fairly low odds and still smile.

__________________
"Not winning on a horse that came first is one thing.....Losing on a horse that didn't come first is something else entirely!!!"