Right race, wrong race

Remove this Banner Ad

Duritz

Duritz

Scourge of Bookmakers
Veteran 30k Posts 10k Posts BeanCoiNFT Investor Bay 13: Vintage Bay
Oct 15, 2007
33,996
31,537
PCO
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
As I had a bottle of wine last night and watched a movie, I kept thinking back onto the debacle that was Oaks day, and what went wrong. Why had I had so many losing bets? The only winning bet I had on that card was on Jamekha in the Oaks. Thinking on that race, I was confident she would run a strong 2500m, as I was with honesta. Ambience I was a little less confident, and sacred eye I was willing to take on and suggest had peaked and wouldn't run it out. Why? Because they all had recent form and I was able to watch their replays and gauge how they were going. In short, they had recent exposed form.

So, I realised, the oaks - although it can be a query - turned out to be a "right race" to bet in. The weather had cleared, the horses had recent, exposed form.

Contrasting that, the sprint races yesterday, down the straight. No idea which side of the track horses are going to go, no idea which side is better. Also, a strong possibility there's fast and slow lanes. Plus, not all horses with recent form. Horses with poor form who are being set for it. Horses first up. Horses who are straight specialists or worse horses who have never raced on the straight track. In hindsight, why did I bet these races? Too much guessing.

Don Scott in his books had a section devoted to "right race, wrong race"; I have his books here, later I'll find the chapter and list what he suggested were right and wrong, but in the meantime I'd like to open a discussion on it. I think it's been a bit of an epiphanic moment for me overnight: just because the race is there, doesn't mean you should do it.

Recent form, exposed form, not many question marks. These are good things.

Lack of recent and/or exposed form, lots of questions, negatives.

Thinking out loud - the Emirates tomorrow is an example of a good race to do.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #2
FallingLiefs liked one at Northam yesterday called wicked hunter. It was first up from a spell, had trialled ok. On last preps figures it was the one to beat. So, what's it going to do? If it goes to its best, it wins. If it doesn't, it probably doesn't. It's trial win was ok, as I said, but not brilliant. Still, the trial win would neither deter you from thinking it will peak, nor make you sure it would.

So, what's the right figure to give it? Initially I had it a $3.00 chance. Then I saw the early markets were $1.60, so had another look, and gave it a figure closer to its top. Now I had it a $2.00 chance. Still, I thought, probably a no bet race. It drifts out, and therefore I end up backing it. Then it keeps drifting and starts >$3.00! This is an alarming sign for a first up runner. Clearly, people knew something I did not. Naturally, its first beaten.

This was a bad bet. Hindsight is 20-20 but I can tell you that as they jumped I did not want to be on. I was guessing as to what mark to give this horse. If I could have known it would drift alarmingly that would give me information about how he was going. I would've given him a lesser mark.

So, horses first up from a spell are not ideal. You cannot know for sure how they are going. Even so called "first up specialists" may not on this occasion be ready.

So, this race should've been a "wrong race" because of the query on the favourite. It should have been left alone.

Welcome others thoughts on right races, wrong races.
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
A quote from Don: "To be a successful punter you must wait for the right races and sidestep the wrong ones. The right races are the ones in which you depend very little on guesswork and have plenty of evidence and solid facts to support your judgement. The wrong races are the ones in which you depend largely on guesswork and have insufficient evidence and few facts."

Don has aptly summed up the straight races yesterday. They were guess races, and should have been left alone. The favourite at Northam Wicked Hunter was a guess, too.

So, here's what he says are the right, and wrong, races. He writes an explanation under each, but I am not typing all that out.

RIGHT RACES

1. Races for horses of the highest class at set weights.
2. Races in which all the runners have a long form history with all strengths and weaknesses known.
3. Races for restricted class horses at set weights
4. Races in which one of two of the runners have much more potential than their rivals
5. Races in which your prices are markedly different from the bookmakers prices (though here he does clarify with the term "if there is no sound evidence to support the bookmakers set of prices")

WRONG RACES

1. Races held when the going is on the worse side of slow, heavy, or very heavy
2. Races for early 2yo's
3. Races for hoses of the lowest class
4. Races in which a number of chances have country, interstate or overseas form only
5. Races in which a number of the main chances are resuming after a spell
6. Races in which a number of the chances are attempting for the first time a distance beyond their best distance range
7. Races in which your prices are the same as the bookmakers
8. Races in which your top rated horse is odds on


He further goes on to say, "As a punter you have one big advantage over a bookmaker - you can choose the races on which you want to bet... Most punters are unrestrained rather than restrained, impatient rather than patient, and incautious rather than cautious... Occasionally - but very occasionally - every race on the programme is a betting proposition. The form patterns are predictable, the class and weight ratings indisputable, and the future ratings as clear as a summer sky at Randwick. On at least half a dozen such occasions I have backed the entire card. On plenty of other occasions I have had a blackout - not a single collect - because I framed doubtful sets of prices based on doubtful data."
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Interesting thread.

I was thinking the other day that feature distance and middle distance racing this country has proven a lottery last few seasons. When for instance has a horse put 2-3 WFA wins on end?

Its the top level sprint racing in Australia where the form going back to Cav and then through Hay List, Buffering and now Chats seems far more reliable.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
Gavin Excell said:
Interesting thread.

I was thinking the other day that feature distance and middle distance racing this country has proven a lottery last few seasons. When for instance has a horse put 2-3 WFA wins on end?

Its the top level sprint racing in Australia where the form going back to Cav and then through Hay List, Buffering and now Chats seems far more reliable.
Click to expand...

That's true, but then if you throw in the possibility of fast/slow patches down the Flemington straight it becomes a lottery again. EG, if the darley were run today at midday, would you bet on it? To my thinking there would be too many unknowns with the track.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
Aussie Assault said:
What's his explanation for Wrong Races # 8 : "Races in which your top rated horse is odds on"?
Click to expand...

He says you should almost never bet odds on horses. They have ways of getting beaten and are bad value, even if you think they are good things. He suggests you'd be better off backing your 2nd or 3rd pick, IF it was value, than backing your "value" odds on top rater. He says he only takes odds on if they are a champion like Tulloch or Dulcify. In today's terms, like Might and Power or Black Caviar.

I agree with it, to be honest. Have been burned too many times at odds on. As a rule I don't take less than $2.00.
 
All your really trying to do is find races with maximum exposed variables but enough to find an edge. For me that generally means isolated country tracks or the top tier racing. The mid tier, mid week city racing I find extremely hard mainly as there are a handful generally evenly matched progressive horses with heaps of form lines. Ratings are great if your system is good enough which mine generally aren't for the evenly matched mob. My normal Saturday normally consists of a 5 minute look at the 60+ events in perth, just to check if there's a freak in there, ignore the 2yo's and stayers and then do markets for 72+ and 3yo's.

Country maidens I ignore unless there's a silly price and generally the lower rated races too. The only real difference with the OP is I take odds on, although it's been a bad month for it for one reason or another.

I'm generally a low volume punter, only 4 or so bets a day.
 
Interesting discussion.

I generally go with the #1 #2 right type races for my punting - generally only bet in black type races, maybe country cups. Like DS says - I figure the form is well exposed, and everyone is trying 100% to win on the day.

I also generally avoid odds on these days - although have punted them in the past. Now I tend to agree with Duritz, DS. Unless there immortals there is too many ways for them to get beat (see Exosphere on Saturday as Exhibit A).
 
Bit of a mug punter myself but obviously agree that being selective with races is obviously in the punter's best interests.

I wouldn't say I am very good at framing an entire market, so I figure value can be found on races with false favorites or 'spruik' horses that don't seem to have any data to back them up.

Disagree with the odds on look on, yes as a punter I have been burned, and I think they get at you more emotionally and cloud your judgement. I've read elsewhere that some of the best bets to be made are on 1.30 type chances that are paying 1.70 or 1.80. I guess they take a bit of nerve. If you are going to take on an odds on horse then a running double can be the best value.


Dr Turf says that races with too many runners from too few trainers are worth letting go through to the keeper as well, plenty of those in Sydney over the last year or so.

Agree on the part about races where one or two have a clear class advantage, this can relegate all those other variables to mere 'noise'.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Duritz said:
FallingLiefs liked one at Northam yesterday called wicked hunter. It was first up from a spell, had trialled ok. On last preps figures it was the one to beat. So, what's it going to do? If it goes to its best, it wins. If it doesn't, it probably doesn't. It's trial win was ok, as I said, but not brilliant. Still, the trial win would neither deter you from thinking it will peak, nor make you sure it would.

So, what's the right figure to give it? Initially I had it a $3.00 chance. Then I saw the early markets were $1.60, so had another look, and gave it a figure closer to its top. Now I had it a $2.00 chance. Still, I thought, probably a no bet race. It drifts out, and therefore I end up backing it. Then it keeps drifting and starts >$3.00! This is an alarming sign for a first up runner. Clearly, people knew something I did not. Naturally, its first beaten.

This was a bad bet. Hindsight is 20-20 but I can tell you that as they jumped I did not want to be on. I was guessing as to what mark to give this horse. If I could have known it would drift alarmingly that would give me information about how he was going. I would've given him a lesser mark.

So, horses first up from a spell are not ideal. You cannot know for sure how they are going. Even so called "first up specialists" may not on this occasion be ready.

So, this race should've been a "wrong race" because of the query on the favourite. It should have been left alone.

Welcome others thoughts on right races, wrong races.
Click to expand...

Why would you change your price based on the price offered unless there was some mistake made in your original process? I have heard professional punters doing just what you have done on the Betting360 podcast but it didn't make sense to me. Surely your price is your price and if you take a second look at it because it comes up much shorter than expected surely you are poisoning your process?

kickazz said:
Dr Turf says...
Click to expand...
:$
 
KardiniaPark said:
Why would you change your price based on the price offered unless there was some mistake made in your original process? I have heard professional punters doing just what you have done on the Betting360 podcast but it didn't make sense to me. Surely your price is your price and if you take a second look at it because it comes up much shorter than expected surely you are poisoning your process?
Click to expand...

In this case because it was first up, I was not sure how it was going for form / fitness. In this scenario, the market is a bit of a lead. In a horse like this you don't have one definitive figure you think they'll do, but a range, because they could do anything from their top down to 5L off their top, depending on if they're fit and ready. So you use the market as a guide. Unfortunately, the early market was completely ******* wrong and the horse was clearly not ready, and eventually drifted accordingly.
 
Duritz said:
In this case because it was first up, I was not sure how it was going for form / fitness. In this scenario, the market is a bit of a lead. In a horse like this you don't have one definitive figure you think they'll do, but a range, because they could do anything from their top down to 5L off their top, depending on if they're fit and ready. So you use the market as a guide. Unfortunately, the early market was completely ******* wrong and the horse was clearly not ready, and eventually drifted accordingly.
Click to expand...

So other examples would be the straight, first time wet...things like that? Not something you would do all being equal?
 
iluvparis said:
Interesting discussion.

I generally go with the #1 #2 right type races for my punting - generally only bet in black type races, maybe country cups. Like DS says - I figure the form is well exposed, and everyone is trying 100% to win on the day.

I also generally avoid odds on these days - although have punted them in the past. Now I tend to agree with Duritz, DS. Unless there immortals there is too many ways for them to get beat (see Exosphere on Saturday as Exhibit A).
Click to expand...

:oops::oops::oops::oops::oops:
 
KardiniaPark said:
So other examples would be the straight, first time wet...things like that? Not something you would do all being equal?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use the market as a lead for either of those things, because that would imply that the camp knew they could or couldn't handle them, when if they haven't raced down the straight or on wet, the camp very likely won't know if they can.
 
Duritz said:
I've ended up doing the last two races. They're the "best" two on the card. Won't be much action though.
Click to expand...

R4 was horrible, just a clear no bet race.
All the horses were like 30 odd starts with 1 win or something like that.
Yeah they are, who did you go with?
I like Schneller in R7 & R8 it's toss up between Bizarre & Jinx.
 
Just on 2yos - had always thought a poor option but i think it may have been Don Scott who points out that the % of 2 year old favourites that win is higher than any other category. And this % win rate compares even more favorably when looking at those that go around at odds on. Critically the condition is they are later season 2yos which I take to be January onwards
 
I would argue that a lot of Don Scotts "wrong races" would be the wrong races for favorite punters but right races for long shot punters. I personally loved heavy tracks in winter as the wet track form is well exposed and there a lot of the field that you can dismiss because they cannot handle the track. Unfortunately synthetic tracks has taken this advantage away from me because we rarely race on heavy tracks anymore.
Races for early 2 year olds are not great, but 1200 meter races for early 2 year olds are great betting (not in Sydney). you can pretty much dismiss any unraced or 1st up 2 year old... its too hard to win first up over that distance and you can dismiss a lot of the field that way.

6. Races in which a number of the chances are attempting for the first time a distance beyond their best distance range = If a number of "chances" are running over the distance for the first time, back the horse who has run over the distance, Its another one of my rules, but this also has changed in the last few years. Training methods have changed and horses can race competitively over a distance first up or on a light preperation

as for right races, the 2 main cups and the cox plate will always be a wrong race from now on. There are too many unknown factors to be confident about anything. I stay away.

I was a fan of Don Scott back in the day, but his methods have been superseded, you have to move with the times otherwise you get left behind. This happened to Don Scott.. he died in suspicious circumstances broke. A lot of the famous "winners" ended up this way, Eric Connelly and Pittsburgh Phil, the only successful ones were the bookies and even a lot of them ended up broke too. I used to win on the races, but not anymore, My methods dont work like they used too for numerous reasons which i realise and I haven't got the time to study the new ones but i bet for fun now and dont lose much. Some of my methods bring up big price winners and that gives me the thrill i need.
One thing i did do back in the day off the punt was after a losing streak i cut up all the articles that i thought were relevant from Practical Punting from the writers i respected and read them over and over,this helped me control myself. I never bet over $50 a race and 5 years later bought a modest unit outright from the winnings. then i lost patience (the biggest thing you need to be successful) and got a proper job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HeathySure
  • Sticky
April Punting Thread - Sydney is racing on a good track - April Fools
2 3 4 5
Replies
109
Views
4K
Jugada
Jugada
P
Harness racing
Replies
14
Views
2K
awfl
awfl
ourgameplandoesntwork
  • Locked
Moved Thread When Betting Agencies Get It Wrong…
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
balmainforever
balmainforever
juice t
Racing February Daily Punt: Sorting out the squibs from the cats
10 11 12 13 14
Replies
348
Views
16K
LukeParkerno1
LukeParkerno1

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top