While out walking this afternoon I was mulling over Beton's stats - especially the stat about favourites under $2.00 win 44% of the time.

Therefore if I layed ever favourite under $2.00 I must make a profit as 56% would lose and even at a 50% win rate a loss will always return more that a win would lose.

I will start trialing tomorrow and will post the results - they should be interesting.

It it works it will be "Inspired by Beton".

I am sure I have missed something major as it all sounds too simple! Any thoughts?

Fred

Hi 4legs. It sounds easy however I'm not sure if those stats are accurate. Wasn't there something like 80% winners under $1.50 or something? Anyway, I think if those stats were right, you would need to take a long term view maybe 6 months plus.

I remember on a UK forum there was one guy that was laying every horse under evens using a bot and he used 100% recovery of only the previous losses (not the loss plus the next bet as sometimes happens) and he went well for a while until the inevitable run of losses happened (the favourites actually won a lot in a row).

Maybe at level stakes it might have worked though.

Good luck Fred and keep us informed.

Fred
Those stats are from the tote. You are laying to betfair and thus there will be discrepancy. As the odds go down the SR rises. I would not lay under $1.50 tote prices. On tote below $1.50 is 50% o/a rising to 82% at $1.20. I would not lay under $1.70 on betfair. I am looking at laying the top three with a backing bet on the fav to soften the sting but this will only work if the the top three are closely priced. Beton

Hi Beton,
Can you give an example of such a bet .
It would be interesting exercise.

__________________
Cheers.

Beton & Ocho- you are both correct - the below confirms your figures, and I can see why you do not lay under $2.00. Taken from Betfair SP Results:

Date Daily Progressive

1-Jun	$ 110.01	$ 110.01
2-Jun	-$ 150.00	-$ 39.99
3-Jun	$ -	-$ 39.99
4-Jun	-$ 28.09	-$ 68.08
5-Jun	$ -	-$ 68.08
6-Jun	-$ 30.00	-$ 98.08
7-Jun	$ -	-$ 98.08
8-Jun	-$ 30.00	-$ 128.08

Summary:
14 Races with a starter under $2.00
Average BSP: $1.54
Won: 10 - 71% SR
Lost: 4 - 29% SR (but all 4 placed)

Bhagwan
lets look at an average race 9 runners. 1st fav $2.50 2nd $4 3rd $6 and 4th $8. It is going to cost $12 to back the fav to get back $30 incl stake. laying SP you will cover 20 bets for the fav 10, 6 and 4.28 bets respectfully on the next three favs. If the fav wins then you win $30 plus the divs from laying the 2nd 3rd and 4th fav, less the $30 liability and the $12 stake. A plus.
If the 2nd or 3rd wins then you come up with a negative. I suggest dropping the 4th and only use the top three as there are too many 4th favs >$10. Unless we can set to lay all horses <$10. Still to be trialled. If any other horse wins then you come out in front. In 100 races you should win 35 times on the fav. Lose 20 times on the 2nd and 15 times on the 3rd, but win 30 times on the rest of the field. On a dozen random races supports this. I was trialling with good results until my bot (BetBotPro) decided that it would lay multiple times (6 x $30 ouch). Until this is sorted or I get another bot this is in abeyence. Also need to work out how to keep the target bet at $30 incl stake rather than target to win $30.
Beton

Bhagwan
if the odds are too small then you run the risk of putting too much on the back bet which is counterproductive in 65% of the races. If the odds are too long then there is too few lay bets to come out in front. Again counterproductive. Having said that on tote the majority of races have the fav between $2 and $3. The idea is to set up 2 bots, one backing and the other laying in the price ranges and forget. Should cover 60%+ of the races.
Beton

beton, In your example how much do you win/lose if the fav wins or the second fav wins, etc? I can't work it out.

Also, what would be the point of both backing and laying the fav. Surely they would cancel each other out or am I missing something. Why not just leave the first fav out then?

Ocho
Every race will be different because of the odds of the three favs.
On the above example laying the top three only. I don't think that there is any gain laying 4. 1st fav win $4. 2nd fav lose $16 3rd fav lose $12 4th fav plus win $24. 100 bets win $860 and lose $500 to come out $360 in front. Betting the fav is a sacrifical bet otherwise you will lose $14 on the fav each time. you only want to have it big enough to break even and be slightly in front on the fav or you will be givng any gains away. If the odds shorten too much then the bet size has to increase so it is a concern but also the lay bets also increase. You can do it manually and get an optimal result but you are better going down the middle road on autopilot. The top three at the above odds give 36 lay bets which would be average and your minimum. If the odds go out too far then you are not going to get even 30 lay bets. Thus you have a minimum odd size and a maximum odds size. Fortunately most of the races are in that range
Beton

Thanks Beton
So
94% Book value based on those prices.

If Fav wins = +8.00

If 2nd Fav wins = -$12.00

If 3rd Fav wins = -$7.72

If 4th fav wins = -$6.00

If all fall over = +$28.00

The O/L total ($40) has to be greater than the individual Liability ($30)

Alternatively
One could total the O/L for the 2nd-4th fav = $20.28

$20.28 divided by the 1st favs price $2.50 = O/L $8.11

$8.11 win bet on Fav.

+$2.16 Prof if fav wins.

This also keeps the Liab down by -$4.00 on each of the 2nd-4th favs
(as above) if they should get up to win race, rather than the original Beton example.

Well done Beton
A very interesting perspective .
Thanks for sharing your findings.

__________________
Cheers.