Matt,

And this is the inherent flaw with overs unders betting / laying.
Ratings tell us what we know, fluctuations tell us what we don't in general.
One can definitely profit from overs betting, there's no argument about that, but perhaps there needs to be something incorporated into ratings which recalculates them by a factor given market information.

Because horses are not teams nor sportsmen, they are animals.

One can rate AFL or Tennis or Soccer and come up with definite odds and overlays, because in general, it is what it is.
With horses sometimes it is what it isn't!
All the stats in the world can't tell you stable opinion, or closed trial form, or negative medical issues.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 399,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/03/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Matt I've had success in the past backing the top selection of those "Crowd Ratings" at unders. If I could get under the rated price I'd back the selection, anything over I'd leave. Worked very well on the top selection, the second top roughly broke even and from third selection and higher you did better backing the overs and leaving the unders. Clearly my pricing needed to give more emphasis to the top two, therefore evening out the gaps. But there's not much use pricing your selections so they match the market

__________________
Pixie

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

Agreed AP,

In fact as a method, many people note down the prices 30 mins to the off on UK racing and back anything under the established market price just before the off.
If ever there was proof that this works, it has been my experience years ago of losing heavily when I was laying early at the given price. The horses that drifted did not win as often as the horses that were nibbled at or plunged on.
So I would always get matched on the money horses and not matched on the unwanted. The firmers were profit backing, the drifters were a huge loss.

But these are long term results, you can have really good or bad days or weeks.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 399,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/03/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Pixie, I have found that focusing on the first 3 favourites primarily has been where the majority of the success is in the testing of this idea although there have been some big profits in the higher end of the scale as well.

The key to what makes this idea a success is by using a multiplier applied to the stake based on the overlay, the higher the overlay the higher the stake but I have a buffer built in by laying to liability. I have been testing with a $30 base liability and applying the multiplier to that, the biggest loss has been $146 with the applied multiplier.

I am also looking at a backing system for unders and so far I have found that of the selctions I am looking at (favourites only with a few filters) the most profitable band has been when the price falls to 60% or below the rated price I use. Same type of multiplier used to maximise the returns, so far there has been around 200 selections (since December) for a 45% S/R and 20% POT at TAB prices.

Chrome, I am yet to look at how fluctuations affect these systems but it is something that I will definitely look into.

Cheers,

Mat.

Beton the testing has been on all days and venues and goings, the filters are nothing out of the ordinary, just things like weight, barrier, distance etc. The key I believe is the overlay based on the rated price I use which so far has proven to be successful but only when I start to place real bets is when I will know for sure.

Cheers,

Mat.

So basically, a ratings system that has a predicted price of $5.00 should long-term have a strike rate of 20%. If it doesn't its impossible to get a correct overlay.

This is all new to me this area of punting, so if I understand the hard thing to predict would be the strike rate is 20% is on all bets if correct.

But if a punter was to bet only on the overlays, this might only have a 10% strike rate because the underlay bets are at 30% making an average of 20%.

In an ideal world if you could obtain $6.00 on every bet rated at $5.00 but often there will be a short $2.00 horse in the mix.

Vortech I would be very surprised if any ratings system was accurate enough to have the $5 chances win 20% of the time etc because as Chrome Prince has pointed out that ratings are based off information we know whereas the price fluctuations are based on information we don't know (basically) which is why a horse might firm or drift late in the betting.

As far as overs winning 10% and unders winning 30% of the time and evening out to 20% it isn't really that simple but in the testing I have done so far with the prices I use the unders have a better strike rate at the pointy end of the market.

Cheers,

Mat.

Mattio,
Would the general conclusion be that we don't necessarily get 'value' with unders, but they win up to 3x more often(than overs) due to positive factors we are unaware of, so we have a better chance of a POT over the long run?

This would make price fluctuations the ultimate filter to be applied?

LG

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

Do you have to incorporate both your ratings value and the starting price and then somehow factor price movements.

LG, I can only speak from my experience and the testing I am currently doing so I don't want to draw any general conclusions but relative to what I am doing I would say yes. I am still to incorporate price movements as a filter.

Cheers,

Mat.