We spoke before about "Betting Without Validation", meaning that if we see something anecdotally happen that fits our built-in bias, we believe it to be true, eventhough when we look at it with some backing numbers it might be totally wrong.
This struck me again reading this forum on Paceadvantage.com. A poster asks what a good estimation of what a horse might pay to place is. Dave Schwartz, proprietor of Horse Street Software, replies around "40% of win odds"; meaning that if a horse is 5-2 (2.5-1) the horse should pay around $4 to place (2.5 x 0.40 = 1.00-1 or $4). Someone replied to Dave that he checked 10 days of results and that is wrong. Dave came back with hard data. He checked 25,000 races, and for horses under 7-1 the ratio is 0.38 and for all odds ranges it is 0.366.
It is something that has struck me in my handicapping life that never ceases to amaze me. I still trust, but now I look to verify.
Similar
Carryovers Provide Big Reach and an Immediate Return
Sinking marketing money directly into the horseplayer by seeding pools is effective, in both theory and practice In Ontario and elsewher...
Popular
-
One of life's many mysteries on gambling twitter is the Jackpot Bet. Oftentimes people like @shottakingtime, echoed by others, will pos...
-
Our wagering game is an incredible mental exercise for many reasons. And one of its characteristics I like best is the variety of thought wh...
-
There's something going on in horse racing today , but I have not really followed it. Instead, I've been thinking about two words we...
-
Unless you are off the twitter grid (God bless you), you've no doubt witnessed the feud of the month(s) between ITP and some public raci...
-
At Northlands Park Wednesday several rabbits were in the infield. This spooked one of the horses, and he took a tumble, sending driver Debbi...
1 comment:
I bet Flambro wasn't included in those 25,000 race. Might be a good rule of thumb in thoroughbred races. Not in standardbred half mile track racing.
Post a Comment