Here is a simple tactic I often employ. If, after analysing a race, I conclude that only four horses in a 10 horse field have a chance of winning, but I cannot split them on their chances, then anything over 3-1 is good value; anything less poor value. By the same token, if I favour one runner in a race, but assess there to be only two dangers, then anything over 2-1 is value. Two other possible outcomes to my one. On the other hand if I´m looking at a big handicap and my fancy is 6-1, but I estimate at least 12 possible dangers, then that would represent poor value, so I would avoid a bet.
Fact is Salsabil, all 10 horses in a 10 horse race will have a chance of winning. So what do you mean by only four "have a chance of winning"? The combined chance of the other six horses added together is likely to eat into your 3/1 calculation on the other four. eg You might think the average chance of the 6 horses only has around one seventh of the other four. is 3%, but that still means the combined chance of the 6 together is 18% (3 X 6) . Therefore your four 25% 3/1 shots = 100% + 18% = 118%.. So, far from working to a 100% book, you'd actually be working to a 118% book... So in this example "anything over 3/1" is NOT value. I'd be very doubtful betting that way would bring long term profit.
Grew up in a betting family father bookmarked, brother is a pro punter ( successful pro punter I should add). Grew up around it even allowed to bet as as a ten year old because we were dads kids as long as the stewards were not around Like I say was bought up with it but never INTERESTED in it at least like my family. Anyway I did not understand value until I was older despite it being talked about so often. I would always argue who cares what odds it is as long as you BELIEVE it’s going to win. In the end you are betting on your belief. It hit me when I was older like I say not a superficial understanding but the actual concept and meaning.
This may seem like a ridiculous question but please bare with me as I'm new to value betting, matched betting etc. I have seen that there's software out there such as each way sniper which indicate when a horse is priced higher at the bookmaker but lower at the exchange, which would indicate that this house has been over priced and is actually more likely to win/place that the odds indicated. I know that over time if you get too many winners the bookmaker will likely restrict your accounts by lowering stakes or blocking you all together. My question is, is there any benefit to selecting these horses and instead putting the bet in at the exchange if the odds weren't too far away? Does this indicate this is still a good bet to take on or is the only benefit gained by putting it on through the bookmaker at the higher price. I'm just wondering if this is a strategy to still spot a good bet? I hope that makes sense. Thank you
A great question. I can't remember the details of Each-Way Sniper, but I think it's looking for value in the place portion of the bets. e.g. the place odds you are being offered in the each-way by the bookmaker are significantly higher than those on the exchange. If this is the case, this happens because the place odds in a place bet are calculated as a 1/5 or 1/4 of the win odds. If the horse has a low chance of winning but a high chance of placing, then the win odds will be high with the bookmaker and the place odds will be low on the exchange. Because the bookmaker has to offer 1/4 or 1/5 of the win odds for the place portion of an each-way bet, the place odds with the bookmaker can be much higher than they should be. This strategy would not work if you placed your bets on the exchange only. I hope that answers the question, but please let me know if you have any more.
You have to be a expert handicapper to beat this game if you want to win consistently. There is no luck in this game. If the odds on your horse are too low you pass the race. You dont bet on another horse just because your horse doesn't offer value
Define "Your horse". The beauty of Value Betting is My Horse could be any horse in the race. My horse is the value horse. So your last sentence does not come into it, because there is NO "your horse" until it is value.
There seems to be one big issue with all this: bookmakers will immediately ban you (or severely limit you) from gambling with them again once they find out you understand value. You don't even have to make huge amounts of bets. In fact, one bet sometimes will already put you in their 'problem bettor' category. There are a few bookies that will allow you to win in the long run, but these places, mostly exchanges rather than regular bookies, are full of people that understand shit, so your competing against other pro's, lowering your chances of making a living out of it. Personally, I know if they let me play against them, they are bound to be screwed, but they don't let me! It's an unfair game played by greedy companies that take advantage of dumb and vulnerable people. What's your experience?
If you are a +EV player then bookmakers will refuse to take bets of any decent size. However, this doesn't happen on the betting exchanges, as you mentioned. You may get a lower ROI on exchanges, depending on commissions levels. While there are more pros on exchanges, for obvious reasons, this doesn't mean the majority are pros and a positive return can still be made.
Thanks for the video. quick two questions from me 1. Are any sports more profitable than others (and also less likely to get you restricted)? 2. Is there anything that can be done to keep your accounts going for longer without getting restricted?
There aren't any other sports that I would think are more profitable than others that isn't based on a personal knowledge/experience. You can help to keep your accounts going a bit longer by placing smaller bets and keeping the account in a loss. You can do this by transfer arbing from your account to Betfair (or another exchange) with the aim to lose the bet with the bookie and profit on the exchange. This moves the profit from the bookmaker to exchange. It will of course cost you the level of commission on your current exchange account.
@@yosibest You can find lots of opportunities in most sports. I would suggest you focus on the one you enjoy the most and suits the times you are available to follow.
@@yosibest most sports will have a number of opportunities, I don't think there are some that produce more than others, it depends on the type of trading/betting you are doing and whether the time the sport is on suits you.
I used your percentages on the horses chances of winning a race against the betfair odds at the time, if the odds were way above the percentage I would back if way below I laid , this was just using the top 3 in the betting, at one point I was 6 points up , after 20 races or so I was back to break even, I think there is something in it and you probably have a long term edge , any thoughts?
Yes but, don't we have to set a minimal percentage ? I mean if the book says 20% chance of winning and i'm thinking like 30%. There's a chance that in a long run, i will lose all my bets. But if i'm setting my limit to 50% minimal (like book thinking 35% but i'm thinking 50) it would be better. Sorry for my english.
Yes, you will need a margin over and above the chance you think the horse has of winning, which takes into account errors. The size of this will be dependent on how good you get at assessing value in the races you focus on, and how much advantage you can get in the market.
To reduce the chance of a losing run it is wise to increase stakes proportionately with the amount of chance you believe the selection has... Along with increasing stakes for the amount of value you believe is in the bet. Kelly Criterion does both and is recognised as an excellent staking plan. Although I'd recommend using a quarter or even an eighth Kelly. If worried betting on lesser percentage chances might increase the risk of a long losing run. Instead of backing only the very best value horse, perhaps consider backing two or more horses in the same race provided they are all believed value. eg. In a 10 runner race if believing one horse has a 25% chance and it is available @ 4/1 (20%), another you think has a 9% chance and is available @ 13/1 (7%) and another believed to have a 6% chance available @ 25/1 (4%)... 25 + 9 + 6 = 40%. Whereas 20 + 7 + 4 = 31. So by backing all three is pretty much the same as backing a 9/4 (31%) shot that you believe has a 40% fair 6/4 chance of winning. Taking a price 9% better than what you believe its combined true odds to be (40 - 31).
I dont uderstand ur point at all ,value bet u mean the perfect odds to bet vs probability of the game or the decimal odd calculated range over time contolled by bookmaker
Value betting is where your average win rate is better than the average odds you have taken across you bets would suggest. For example if you were winning on average 40% of your bets and your average odds were 3.00, then you would be value betting.
When people talk about the percentage chance of a horse winning? How do you work out that percentage chance? I understand once you have the percentage working out what the odds should be etc. But how do you get a figure for the percentage chance?
Working out the exact percentage chance is very difficult to do with any accuracy. If you're good with statistics and programming, then you may be able to do it, otherwise I would suggest you focus on learning when the odds represent good value, this is something that can only be learned through practice, and developing an instinctive feel for the horses you pick. You must also pick the horses, they can't be picked by someone else as you won't have enough insight in them to learn this. You could also look to build strategies that show a small advantage and then use your own analysis to make it larger, this is what we teach at www.raceadvisor.co.uk
Value betting is the key. But you have to be a expert handicapper to find the correct chances of winning. There is no other way. People try to pick winners just using numbers. It doesn't work
What a confusing useless explanation...No mention of the " Wisdom of crowds " such as referring to Pinnacle or the exchange such as Betfair . Which is the only way of determining Value !
exactly, the BSP determines if you got 'value' or not. If someone got 4.0 an hour before the race and the BSP ended up being 3.0, they did great. But the catch is ... that's impossible to do. The crowd (a super-intelligence) takes right up to the moment the race goes off to determine the correct odds (even 5 minutes before they fluctuate radically), so how can a mere individual determine hours before the race that the odds are going to go down? My analogy is can a person with a thermometer, a barometer , and a wind gauge determine the weather 48 hours in advance better than the National Weather Service. Of course not. So why should a person be able to ascertain odds well in advance of The Crowd? they cannot (unless they have some amazing 'inside info' about a horse).
If you and I were betting on the toss of a coin the chance of it coming down heads is 50% Evens and the chance of it coming up tails is 50% Evens. If every time you win I pay you out £1 and for every time I win you pay me out £1.25... ie I am getting paid 5/4 about a true Even money chance... Now let's say you win the first two tosses and are so far £2 up. Did you get value or did I? In the long term if we have 1000 tosses of the same 5/4 wager then who is likely to be in front long term? It is the same with horse racing. If I find a race where 5/4 is available in a race I believe it has a 50% of winning I'll back it. The difference is that in sports betting nobody actually knows for certain the 5/4 is value. One punter's value back bet can be another punter's value Lay. However, if a punter has a good knowledge of the form book and (equally important) is good at evaluating that form into chance. Then he will make a profit in the long term.
If a bet pays out then it's a winning bet, there could still be value in the odds even if a bet doesn't win. Value has to be considered over the long-term.
@@raceadvisor How can there possibly be value if you lose, this has nothing to do with long term as the result of one bet cannot be linked to the performance of another. Each to its own merits, win=value, lose=nil value
@@russellturner4730 the value is based on the odds and true probability of the horse winning. If the odds are 2.00 and the true probability of the horse winning is greater than 50% then there is value to be had in the odds.
Well an easy way to think of it is would you back Man City to win the league at 100/1… of course you would. They might not win it, but you know if you did that every season you would come out well on top. That’s a value price.
Hi Russell, you might get paid out on a bet, I am a bookmaker and run a business and my job is to take money of people who back at odds with zero value, or even minis expected value, I know in the long run I don't mind paying out on bad value winners, as customers are like sheep, they get one odds on shot to win that should have been 5/2,they double up on there winnings and back the next odds on shot, we bookies know what is coming and price up the next race at even lower value, sooner or later the odds on favorite will get beat, and then the customer will go on the chase, and that is when I know I have them, and if I know it is poor value I personally go on smarkets as I don't pay commission, and back it at true value odds of 3.5 ie 5/2
Here is a simple tactic I often employ. If, after analysing a race, I conclude that only four horses in a 10 horse field have a chance of winning, but I cannot split them on their chances, then anything over 3-1 is good value; anything less poor value. By the same token, if I favour one runner in a race, but assess there to be only two dangers, then anything over 2-1 is value. Two other possible outcomes to my one. On the other hand if I´m looking at a big handicap and my fancy is 6-1, but I estimate at least 12 possible dangers, then that would represent poor value, so I would avoid a bet.
Thank you very much for sharing :)
Fact is Salsabil, all 10 horses in a 10 horse race will have a chance of winning. So what do you mean by only four "have a chance of winning"? The combined chance of the other six horses added together is likely to eat into your 3/1 calculation on the other four. eg You might think the average chance of the 6 horses only has around one seventh of the other four. is 3%, but that still means the combined chance of the 6 together is 18% (3 X 6) . Therefore your four 25% 3/1 shots = 100% + 18% = 118%.. So, far from working to a 100% book, you'd actually be working to a 118% book... So in this example "anything over 3/1" is NOT value. I'd be very doubtful betting that way would bring long term profit.
Grew up in a betting family father bookmarked, brother is a pro punter ( successful pro punter I should add). Grew up around it even allowed to bet as as a ten year old because we were dads kids as long as the stewards were not around
Like I say was bought up with it but never INTERESTED in it at least like my family. Anyway I did not understand value until I was older despite it being talked about so often. I would always argue who cares what odds it is as long as you BELIEVE it’s going to win. In the end you are betting on your belief. It hit me when I was older like I say not a superficial understanding but the actual concept and meaning.
This may seem like a ridiculous question but please bare with me as I'm new to value betting, matched betting etc.
I have seen that there's software out there such as each way sniper which indicate when a horse is priced higher at the bookmaker but lower at the exchange, which would indicate that this house has been over priced and is actually more likely to win/place that the odds indicated.
I know that over time if you get too many winners the bookmaker will likely restrict your accounts by lowering stakes or blocking you all together.
My question is, is there any benefit to selecting these horses and instead putting the bet in at the exchange if the odds weren't too far away? Does this indicate this is still a good bet to take on or is the only benefit gained by putting it on through the bookmaker at the higher price.
I'm just wondering if this is a strategy to still spot a good bet?
I hope that makes sense. Thank you
A great question. I can't remember the details of Each-Way Sniper, but I think it's looking for value in the place portion of the bets. e.g. the place odds you are being offered in the each-way by the bookmaker are significantly higher than those on the exchange. If this is the case, this happens because the place odds in a place bet are calculated as a 1/5 or 1/4 of the win odds. If the horse has a low chance of winning but a high chance of placing, then the win odds will be high with the bookmaker and the place odds will be low on the exchange. Because the bookmaker has to offer 1/4 or 1/5 of the win odds for the place portion of an each-way bet, the place odds with the bookmaker can be much higher than they should be. This strategy would not work if you placed your bets on the exchange only. I hope that answers the question, but please let me know if you have any more.
@@raceadvisor it does thank you for taking the time to reply.
very well spoken
You have to be a expert handicapper to beat this game if you want to win consistently. There is no luck in this game. If the odds on your horse are too low you pass the race. You dont bet on another horse just because your horse doesn't offer value
Define "Your horse".
The beauty of Value Betting is My Horse could be any horse in the race. My horse is the value horse.
So your last sentence does not come into it, because there is NO "your horse" until it is value.
There seems to be one big issue with all this: bookmakers will immediately ban you (or severely limit you) from gambling with them again once they find out you understand value. You don't even have to make huge amounts of bets. In fact, one bet sometimes will already put you in their 'problem bettor' category. There are a few bookies that will allow you to win in the long run, but these places, mostly exchanges rather than regular bookies, are full of people that understand shit, so your competing against other pro's, lowering your chances of making a living out of it. Personally, I know if they let me play against them, they are bound to be screwed, but they don't let me! It's an unfair game played by greedy companies that take advantage of dumb and vulnerable people.
What's your experience?
If you are a +EV player then bookmakers will refuse to take bets of any decent size. However, this doesn't happen on the betting exchanges, as you mentioned. You may get a lower ROI on exchanges, depending on commissions levels. While there are more pros on exchanges, for obvious reasons, this doesn't mean the majority are pros and a positive return can still be made.
Thanks for the video. quick two questions from me
1. Are any sports more profitable than others (and also less likely to get you restricted)?
2. Is there anything that can be done to keep your accounts going for longer without getting restricted?
There aren't any other sports that I would think are more profitable than others that isn't based on a personal knowledge/experience.
You can help to keep your accounts going a bit longer by placing smaller bets and keeping the account in a loss. You can do this by transfer arbing from your account to Betfair (or another exchange) with the aim to lose the bet with the bookie and profit on the exchange. This moves the profit from the bookmaker to exchange. It will of course cost you the level of commission on your current exchange account.
@@raceadvisor I refrase my question are there any sports that produce more opportunities than others?
@@yosibest You can find lots of opportunities in most sports. I would suggest you focus on the one you enjoy the most and suits the times you are available to follow.
@@yosibest most sports will have a number of opportunities, I don't think there are some that produce more than others, it depends on the type of trading/betting you are doing and whether the time the sport is on suits you.
I used your percentages on the horses chances of winning a race against the betfair odds at the time, if the odds were way above the percentage I would back if way below I laid , this was just using the top 3 in the betting, at one point I was 6 points up , after 20 races or so I was back to break even, I think there is something in it and you probably have a long term edge , any thoughts?
There's definitely some potential worth exploring, you'd need to get more data to see if it was a long term proposition.
Yes but, don't we have to set a minimal percentage ?
I mean if the book says 20% chance of winning and i'm thinking like 30%. There's a chance that in a long run, i will lose all my bets.
But if i'm setting my limit to 50% minimal (like book thinking 35% but i'm thinking 50) it would be better.
Sorry for my english.
Yes, you will need a margin over and above the chance you think the horse has of winning, which takes into account errors. The size of this will be dependent on how good you get at assessing value in the races you focus on, and how much advantage you can get in the market.
To reduce the chance of a losing run it is wise to increase stakes proportionately with the amount of chance you believe the selection has... Along with increasing stakes for the amount of value you believe is in the bet. Kelly Criterion does both and is recognised as an excellent staking plan. Although I'd recommend using a quarter or even an eighth Kelly.
If worried betting on lesser percentage chances might increase the risk of a long losing run. Instead of backing only the very best value horse, perhaps consider backing two or more horses in the same race provided they are all believed value. eg. In a 10 runner race if believing one horse has a 25% chance and it is available @ 4/1 (20%), another you think has a 9% chance and is available @ 13/1 (7%) and another believed to have a 6% chance available @ 25/1 (4%)... 25 + 9 + 6 = 40%. Whereas 20 + 7 + 4 = 31. So by backing all three is pretty much the same as backing a 9/4 (31%) shot that you believe has a 40% fair 6/4 chance of winning. Taking a price 9% better than what you believe its combined true odds to be (40 - 31).
I dont uderstand ur point at all ,value bet u mean the perfect odds to bet vs probability of the game or the decimal odd calculated range over time contolled by bookmaker
Value betting is where your average win rate is better than the average odds you have taken across you bets would suggest. For example if you were winning on average 40% of your bets and your average odds were 3.00, then you would be value betting.
When people talk about the percentage chance of a horse winning? How do you work out that percentage chance? I understand once you have the percentage working out what the odds should be etc. But how do you get a figure for the percentage chance?
Working out the exact percentage chance is very difficult to do with any accuracy. If you're good with statistics and programming, then you may be able to do it, otherwise I would suggest you focus on learning when the odds represent good value, this is something that can only be learned through practice, and developing an instinctive feel for the horses you pick. You must also pick the horses, they can't be picked by someone else as you won't have enough insight in them to learn this. You could also look to build strategies that show a small advantage and then use your own analysis to make it larger, this is what we teach at www.raceadvisor.co.uk
Whatever stats or computer software you use there will always be a human input and ask 5 people and you will get 6 different opinions
Value betting is the key. But you have to be a expert handicapper to find the correct chances of winning. There is no other way. People try to pick winners just using numbers. It doesn't work
Excellent
taking all bets. against all odds. 999999999999999999999999999999/1spit winnings... thats a lick... everyone that didnt join.
What a confusing useless explanation...No mention of the " Wisdom of crowds " such as referring to Pinnacle or the exchange such as Betfair .
Which is the only way of determining Value !
exactly, the BSP determines if you got 'value' or not. If someone got 4.0 an hour before the race and the BSP ended up being 3.0, they did great. But the catch is ... that's impossible to do. The crowd (a super-intelligence) takes right up to the moment the race goes off to determine the correct odds (even 5 minutes before they fluctuate radically), so how can a mere individual determine hours before the race that the odds are going to go down? My analogy is can a person with a thermometer, a barometer , and a wind gauge determine the weather 48 hours in advance better than the National Weather Service. Of course not. So why should a person be able to ascertain odds well in advance of The Crowd? they cannot (unless they have some amazing 'inside info' about a horse).
If you and I were betting on the toss of a coin the chance of it coming down heads is 50% Evens and the chance of it coming up tails is 50% Evens. If every time you win I pay you out £1 and for every time I win you pay me out £1.25... ie I am getting paid 5/4 about a true Even money chance... Now let's say you win the first two tosses and are so far £2 up. Did you get value or did I? In the long term if we have 1000 tosses of the same 5/4 wager then who is likely to be in front long term? It is the same with horse racing. If I find a race where 5/4 is available in a race I believe it has a 50% of winning I'll back it. The difference is that in sports betting nobody actually knows for certain the 5/4 is value. One punter's value back bet can be another punter's value Lay. However, if a punter has a good knowledge of the form book and (equally important) is good at evaluating that form into chance. Then he will make a profit in the long term.
Simply "value" is if a bet pays out, if it loses there was clearly no value.
If a bet pays out then it's a winning bet, there could still be value in the odds even if a bet doesn't win. Value has to be considered over the long-term.
@@raceadvisor How can there possibly be value if you lose, this has nothing to do with long term as the result of one bet cannot be linked to the performance of another. Each to its own merits, win=value, lose=nil value
@@russellturner4730 the value is based on the odds and true probability of the horse winning. If the odds are 2.00 and the true probability of the horse winning is greater than 50% then there is value to be had in the odds.
Well an easy way to think of it is would you back Man City to win the league at 100/1… of course you would. They might not win it, but you know if you did that every season you would come out well on top. That’s a value price.
Hi Russell, you might get paid out on a bet, I am a bookmaker and run a business and my job is to take money of people who back at odds with zero value, or even minis expected value, I know in the long run I don't mind paying out on bad value winners, as customers are like sheep, they get one odds on shot to win that should have been 5/2,they double up on there winnings and back the next odds on shot, we bookies know what is coming and price up the next race at even lower value, sooner or later the odds on favorite will get beat, and then the customer will go on the chase, and that is when I know I have them, and if I know it is poor value I personally go on smarkets as I don't pay commission, and back it at true value odds of 3.5 ie 5/2