How do we all (members here) assess/evaluate what ‘value’ is, when placing a bet?

[Captain Chris]

I find "value" to be that moment when, after hours of studying and narrowing down the field to one or two selections, I finally take the plunge and load up odds checker. In that moment, I either smile or swear and tear up my notes. No definitive answer or number in mind; just a gut feeling in that moment.

I guess the aim is to find where I think bookies have got the early prices wrong and I can beat SP. Ideal scenario being where there is a favourite that I don't rate (although I never check the odds before studying the race). Similar to FF, I don't back short priced horses and will (nearly) always go ew. Excluding Cheltenham, over 80% of my bets/stakes last year were in handicaps, so short prices were never going to be for me.

[Odin]

I find "value" to be that moment when, after hours of studying and narrowing down the field to one or two selections, I finally take the plunge and load up odds checker. In that moment, I either smile or swear and tear up my notes. No definitive answer or number in mind; just a gut feeling in that moment.

This almost perfectly sums up my idea of value!

Typically for me, I don't think many horses are value at odds on and those that are (e.g. Frankel), I usually prefer to enjoy watching them rather than worry about what could go wrong.

Usually, I'm looking for a horse that is 4/1 or more (unless I'm extremely confident in its chance). I found this figure by analysing all the bets I did over a full flat season a few years ago, finding that I had a 25% strike rate at (if I remember correctly) average odds of 11/2. All of that could have changed by now, but I don't have the time re evaluate unfortunately.

[Quevega]

It’s obviously not easy to avoid conflating value in this context to monetary value
and calculating the probability of outcome in a horse race is an impossible science to get 100% accuracy in.

And as the captain says in his good example of how it works in racing. For whatever reasons behind it. We would all price up the race differently more often than not.
One person’s perception of value before betting might be another’s poor value. They may both have valid reasons. One is probably more right than the other though, based on consensus usually.
getting the right result doesn’t always mean you made the right bet though and vice versa.

[Quevega]

All the don’t bet on odds on merchants out there has nothing to do with value. It’s a personal choice based around financial profit vs loss.
nothing wrong with this.
but it has nothing to do with value in horse racing.

[Istabraq]

Some of the best bets I've ever had have lost, circumstance/situations can conspire to go against you.

A couple of years ago I wanted to lay South Africa runs in a One Day International, they were 160-6 the line was set around 230, I prefer to pay extra for some insurance so I wanted under 250 runs and put an order up at what I though was 2.4, the potentially horrific mistake I made was not putting a decimal point in my order so I effectively gave someone the chance to back 250 runs or over at 24 (23/1), any of the traders who managed to get on that day would have had the best bet of their lives and I was staring at a huge liability.
South Africa were bowled out for 198 so I got away with it, doesn't alter the fact someone backed a 6/4 shot at 23/1, which is a great bet...

[Odin]

All the don’t bet on odds on merchants out there has nothing to do with value. It’s a personal choice based around financial profit vs loss.
nothing wrong with this.
but it has nothing to do with value in horse racing.

This is a very fair point. That said, I consider less odds on chances than most value simply because I have quite a large buffer for 'unexpected things that could go wrong' within my thought process (i.e. not necessarily because their form does/doesn't suggest they are value). If I took that out, I probably would be more in line with anyone who does back at odds on.

[Kevloaf]

When people say a price is value now as it'll be shorter if the race was today is always an interesting point of contention too.

[Lbur4288]

Anetpost: Substantially higher than what I reckon their SP will be on the day (substantial being relative - while Bob Ollinger isn't huge "value", if he does what I think he can, I'd estimate he is very unlike to be 4/1 come Thursday)

During the week: Balancing what I deem the likely winner vs their odds as a percentage chance

My myopic way of thinking about it

That's my idea of value. If you can get the odds at significantly better than the SP then you've cracked it with the value of the price. A few of my friends were late to the Bob Olinger party last year and backed at 10s and 5s, even prior to the race they had value as he went off 11/8.

[Kevloaf]

Also, one thing from the opening post to consider Bollinger

Some people would consider a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

In this ante post context, even if it is good value, having money accessible now to play with and not tied up for 12-18 months has its benefits.

[FinalFurlong91]

This almost perfectly sums up my idea of value!

Typically for me, I don't think many horses are value at odds on and those that are (e.g. Frankel), I usually prefer to enjoy watching them rather than worry about what could go wrong.

Usually, I'm looking for a horse that is 4/1 or more (unless I'm extremely confident in its chance). I found this figure by analysing all the bets I did over a full flat season a few years ago, finding that I had a 25% strike rate at (if I remember correctly) average odds of 11/2. All of that could have changed by now, but I don't have the time re evaluate unfortunately.

Whilst that's true I'm not sure 4/1 is value for a horse in a novice chase when we've never seen them jump a fence

If hed pinged round his first novice chase it probably is

Any normal year hed by 7 or 8/1 at this stage but the bookies seem to be mitigating losses

[Odin]

Whilst that's true I'm not sure 4/1 is value for a horse in a novice chase when we've never seen them jump a fence

If hed pinged round his first novice chase it probably is

Any normal year hed by 7 or 8/1 at this stage but the bookies seem to be mitigating losses

Yep, I should point out that my comments above were only ever based on the final decs odds (at that point I didn't do any antepost betting). This is only my second season taking antepost betting seriously, so it wouldn't be fair on me to comment on what my perception of value is antepost at this point as even I don't know what it is!

[robith]

When people say a price is value now as it'll be shorter if the race was today is always an interesting point of contention too.

I noticed on the handicaps this year obvs with the talking horse favs like Bosses Oscar or Sky Pirate, if you missed the big prices they never came back, but for a lot of the field you could get another swing on the day.

I missed the big prices on Mrs Milner, but I still got 14s on the day which is a fair old price

[robith]

Whilst that's true I'm not sure 4/1 is value for a horse in a novice chase when we've never seen them jump a fence

If hed pinged round his first novice chase it probably is

Any normal year hed by 7 or 8/1 at this stage but the bookies seem to be mitigating losses

I guess Q is right in that regard, it's all about perspective. my view is BO pings a couple of easy races, price collapses I'm laughing.

He looks like a tanker, Henry has a virus etc, and I'm wrong. All in the game I guess

[archie]

If you're building a book on a single race and you get to the stage where you have all runners covered for a certain profit, those bets in combination are certainly value. However, if you're just backing a single horse, you should be backing it because you think that it's the one most likely to make you a profit. At that stage you look for the best price available at the time and value just doesn't come into the equation.

This time last year, some of those with the Shishkin/EA double were claiming value because both horses would start odds on. So many things can go wrong in 6 months and, even supposing that the horse(s) keeps the date with the starter, we saw that even more things can go wrong in the next 6 minutes. The concept of value this far out is delusional. We've all taken consolation from beating the SP but it really is just an ego thing (or a way of explaining the bitter shandy instead of champagne to your other half).

[Quevega]

If you're building a book on a single race and you get to the stage where you have all runners covered for a certain profit, those bets in combination are certainly value. However, if you're just backing a single horse, you should be backing it because you think that it's the one most likely to make you a profit. At that stage you look for the best price available at the time and value just doesn't come into the equation.

This time last year, some of those with the Shishkin/EA double were claiming value because both horses would start odds on. So many things can go wrong in 6 months and, even supposing that the horse(s) keeps the date with the starter, we saw that even more things can go wrong in the next 6 minutes. The concept of value this far out is delusional. We've all taken consolation from beating the SP but it really is just an ego thing (or a way of explaining the bitter shandy instead of champagne to your other half).

Nope.