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

[Spectre]

Frankel was value at 1/20 in this race:

https://www.racingpost.com/results/21/goodwood/2012-08-01/555673

Typical. You poke your head round the door and all you do is drop a double F (flat, frankel) bomb.

[Bollinger]

Well, after setting up this thread a couple of weeks ago, it’s been fascinating to read everyone’s views here. And of course, as expected, such a wide range of differing views, counter arguments and everything in between!

One point made here by a contributor, and one that I’ve heard many times before is the old adage ‘A 6/4 winner is always much more value than a 50/1 loser’. Of course, this is mathematically evidentially true - especially if the 50/1 bet is win only.

But what if you chosen the 50/1 shot over the 6/4 horse (you’ve spotted something in the market with the 50/1 shot that you believe means it shouldn’t be that price at all) and that 50/1 shot only gets beaten by half a length? Yes, you lose. You lose all value you thought you had. The guy next to you who had a huge wedge on the 6/4 winner is standing next to you with a small pot of gold in his hand - but it’s interesting to note still…..just because you’ve lost the 50/1 shot, does this still make this bet “of no value”, just because it lost?


It’s intriguing.


I only mention this scenario because of the recently published news of Monkfish’s season ending injury. I, like a few people here, had (around Christmas last year) the Shishkin/Monkfish 4 timer ‘Arkle/RSA/Champion Chase/Gold Cup’ at odds of 200/1 and 150/1. I posted it in my diary. I thought the price was huge considering both protagonists were hovering around the evens money price even a couple of months in advance of their novice engagements at Cheltenham.

News breaking on Tuesday of Monkfish’s injury has obviously rendered this bet as lost now, and therefore “of no value whatsoever”, but I am of the firm belief that actually, it was a hell of a bet. Hell of a lot of value. I thought it at the time, and I’m thinking it as I type these words. I genuinely believe that just because a horse gets injured/ loses does not necessarily make that bet a ‘bad bet’ or one ‘not of any value’.

(It might have opened up the door to the 225/1 Shishkin/Envoi Allen double a few are on too, I hope….l..)



What are people’s thoughts here?

Do people only consider ‘winning bets’ to be those of value, and whatever the price?

Or is ante post betting (the way I SPECIFICALLY see it) purely about hoovering up every single piece of value they perceive they can, and finding out the results after the event?


I’m intrigued as to people’s thoughts here.

[Spectre]

In regards to your specific question, we all play antepost because we get 'value' prices for the Festival. I doubt anyone would say differently. It would be a bit mad to risk your money this far out if you weren't doing it because of the value you get.

And of course the best bets are the ones than win, but we still backed the ones that lost too The thought process and reason for backing was the same though.

Referring you back to my original answer, it doesn't matter whether it's a 5/2 shot that goes off at 4/7, or a 50/1 shot that goes off at 10/1, the principle for backing them remains the same. We see the possibility of a return at a moment in time, and we believe the price will be much shorter when the event happens.

[Cheltenham Novice Chase]

Hi Spectre - I’m not sure I entirely agree with the point you make about prices contracting nearer the race being a determinant of the value of a bet placed some time earlier. For me value is: securing odds which you believe underestimates the odds of success at the time you place the bet. A lot of prices will contract nearer the time of the race, simply because their is less time to go before the races starts which means there is more chance of the horse lining up at the start and we will probably know more about a horse’s chance the nearer we get to race time.

A value bet is placing a bet at, for example, 9-1 (10% chance) when you believe the horse has a chance of > 10% of winning, irrespective of the time at which the bet is placed. As the race nears and the horse looks more likely to run in the said race and perhaps has won a race on route to the festival, the odds will most likely be contract, perhaps to 7-1. Value is not determined by comparing the prices 9-1 with the 7-1. The difference in price will most probably reflect the increased probability of the horse running in the race and the additional information available which has probably influenced the weight on money bet on the horse.

In my example, there are two opportunities to asses value (obviously because I’ve only cited two prices). If a bet is placed some time in advance of the race at 9-1, that bet is value if you believe the odds of success are >10%. A bet at 7-1 (12.5%) nearer the race is also value, if you believe the chances of success are >12.5%.

Obviously there is a judgement to be made when assessing the horse’s chance of winning and that is of course the skill in betting. If one is a good judge of a horse then continuing to place bets on the value basis described above, should result in a profit over time. Obviously some bets may win and some may lose. So the winning or losing of bets isn’t necessarily a determinant of value. That said because of the subjective and judgement involved in betting, if one continues to place what one believes to be value bets but continually loses money then perhaps the judgement and assessment of horses needs to be improved.

I think, in the main, we’re saying similar things. ie the odds don’t matter per se so long as the odds under estimate what you believe to be the chance of the horse winning. But the contraction of a price nearer the event having already placed a bet earlier at larger odds is not, in my opinion, a determinant of value.

[Spectre]

But the contraction of a price nearer the event having already placed a bet earlier at larger odds is not, in my opinion, a determinant of value.

No, not necessarily CNC, but the contraction of odds because of events you predict will happen along the way ultimately contributes to which horses make the final field and what their chances are. Therefore they are value because your judgement predicts that value.

Many will regard Shishkin as poor value around the 2/1 mark. But the was due to line up against Energumene last year and until Energume was pulled he was odds on and Energumene was around 5/2. I predict Shishkin will go off as an odds on favourite (and win), and 2/1 is therefore value.

[Lobos]

In regards to your specific question, we all play antepost because we get 'value' prices for the Festival. I doubt anyone would say differently. It would be a bit mad to risk your money this far out if you weren't doing it because of the value you get.

And of course the best bets are the ones than win, but we still backed the ones that lost too The thought process and reason for backing was the same though.

Referring you back to my original answer, it doesn't matter whether it's a 5/2 shot that goes off at 4/7, or a 50/1 shot that goes off at 10/1, the principle for backing them remains the same. We see the possibility of a return at a moment in time, and we believe the price will be much shorter when the event happens.

Nail on head here Spectre as far as I'm concerned. I rarely back shorties AP but do make the odd exception. This year Honeysuckle being one. Took the 3's early as , taking everything into account, I thought that was real value as I can see her going off around 1-2 on the day should she get there fit and in at least the same form as this March.

[Cheltenham Novice Chase]

No, not necessarily CNC, but the contraction of odds because of events you predict will happen along the way ultimately contributes to which horses make the final field and what their chances are. Therefore they are value because your judgement predicts that value.

Many will regard Shishkin as poor value around the 2/1 mark. But the was due to line up against Energumene last year and until Energume was pulled he was odds on and Energumene was around 5/2. I predict Shishkin will go off as an odds on favourite (and win), and 2/1 is therefore value.

2-1 is only value if you think Shishkin has better than a 33% chance of winning, factoring in all the various permutations that could transpire between now and the end of the race. When you say you predict he will win, which may well be the case, that doesn’t mean he has a 100% chance of winning. I think what you’re saying is, you believe he an odds-on chance of winning now, factoring in all the permutations ie > 50% chance of winning. Let’s say you believe he has a 64% chance of winning (or 4-7 ish) then a bet placed at 1-2 (or 66%) is not value. 64% would be your cut-off price.

I think he will probably win too but right now I’m not sure I would make that probability higher than 33%. Obviously it is also a higher risk approach because of the capital required to make a sizeable return but I know you know that, so I won’t labour the point.

[Ice]

Nail on head here Spectre as far as I'm concerned. I rarely back shorties AP but do make the odd exception. This year Honeysuckle being one. Took the 3's early as , taking everything into account, I thought that was real value as I can see her going off around 1-2 on the day should she get there fit and in at least the same form as this March.

I did the same as you lobos, went In early as i think she'll be odds on on the day, i won't have anything else on her now.

[Lobos]

I did the same as you lobos, went In early as i think she'll be odds on on the day, i won't have anything else on her now.

Me neither. Had my biggest ever bet on her. Always a risk but I love her to bits. She owes me nothing after the last two Cheltenham's. She may well turn out to be the best Mare ever.

[Quevega]

Me neither. Had my biggest ever bet on her. Always a risk but I love her to bits. She owes me nothing after the last two Cheltenham's. She may well turn out to be the best Mare ever.

Impossible.

[Lobos]

Impossible.

......in my lifetime.

[Ice]

Me neither. Had my biggest ever bet on her. Always a risk but I love her to bits. She owes me nothing after the last two Cheltenham's. She may well turn out to be the best Mare ever.

I remember you were very sweet on her last season and were on at fancy odds, your confidence almost tempted me to back her but unfortunately i didn't !