Jump to content
The Race Place

Catalyst $1.10


Hesi

Recommended Posts

Finally a glimmer of sense on the other channel

Chief Stipe

Administrators

 1,774

11,532 posts

Posted 50 minutes ago

  2 hours ago, All The Aces said:

FYI I had three cracks one at $1.70 & 2 more at $1.60

$1:70 was a good price comparative to the NZ TAB at $1:10.

 

  2 hours ago, All The Aces said:

Just wish Curious and Bazza were offering odds. $4.50 & $4.30

Surely you understand that is their assessment of what they would consider a "value" price.  It isnt meant to be an indicator of what the tote or bookies would offer.

Based on their assessment they probably wouldn't have had a bet in the race.

Catalyst may be better value in his next race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And pricing a horse at $5 doesn't mean you would offer that. You only need to offer a price the punters will take. So laying Catalyst to win a grand would have not been a big loss. You'd have been easily able to do and only lose $150 or less. 

What type of stupidity is it to think that if someone rated a horse at $10 would offer that, if punters wanted to back it at $1.12.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 1/30/2020 at 10:31 PM, VvD said:

Paid $1.10 on the tote so wasn't only the NZ TAB bookies who assessed him at that price.

and just to be clear - my question wasn't intended as "theoretical BS post race" - it was a genuine question trying to understand different rating methods.  The horse was rated 15 & 18 points better than the next two most favoured horses in the race,  and under SW&P was only giving them 2kgs (4kgs to the filly, but 2kgs if you allow for the 2kg gender allowance).

This is a good question. 

I use a set method of determining chance which is related to horse performance based around time of performance overall and with some consideration around distance/track condition (and a few other things around horse history). Those performances being related to its competitors in the same way. But my methods ignore finishing position and class of race, but they do use a method of allowing comparison between a time run on track A over distance B on assessed track condition C with any other time run on track D over distance E on assessed track condition F.

So if a horse wins 10 G1s in a row but all in relatively slow time, the horse might well be brilliant, but I won't have assessed the horse to that degree.

So it may well have been winning (which I ignore), but meet horses running faster in their prior races. The public may be happy to take $1.10, and I'll be different. The horse may then win as it was better than what it had shown on the track in terms of time. I'm happy for that to happen. And as you say, I'd have been likely to assess a horse as having a better chance relative to odds available - and betting on that would therefore lose in this example. For me, it's about whether the assessment works out over time. If I had 1000 Catalyst type events where I rated it say 1.60, I certainly expect that only around 600 of them won, not 900. 

If 900 times that won, then I'd be wanting to re-evaluate as to how I got it so wrong.

Remembering of course, that a horse at $1.10 on the tote is afforded approximately a 71.3% - 77.8% chance of winning. Which isn't much more than someone who may have assessed the horse at a 63% chance? The difference being that even if you thought it had a 80% chance of winning, the $1.10 is still not value.

You could say my methods are therefore wrong. And I'd be happy for anyone to think that. In all of Winx's Cox Plate wins, I rated her as less chance than the public, and she still won.

I also ignore the rating the jurisdiction gives a horse - so I ignore whether the horse is rated 100 racing against a horse rated 60 - irrespective of the weight variance. The rating is someone else's assessment. 

(This is in respect of my pricing, not the 25% chance, but the idea is still the same)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...