Southwell 12.20 18th January, 2018 What a joke!!!!!!!

[Derek27]

I am starting to worry about this as it was head to head a long way out to the line. Did anyone else hit a similar problem on the race.

They can be head to head and one look like a 1.33 and the other looks like a 3, especially if they are still 1/4f out. You're also competing against a lot of people playing the close finish game so good luck getting filled.

Derek Thompson is the only commentator who would give a description of a dramatic and exciting head-to-head finish when one of them is clearly on top or always holding the other.

[Derek27]

I am starting to worry about this as it was head to head a long way out to the line. Did anyone else hit a similar problem on the race.

Not quite sure what you were worrying about, but if you're strategy is to lay the entire field, you may be better off not watching the race and just moving onto the next.

Laying the field requires a certain percentage of winners to succeed so you just need to focus on finding the best price and the best races or courses where it works.

[ShaunWhite]

Was that better ? (15:55) In that battle 2nd hit 1.32.

[ANGELS15]

I don't know how to post a link to a thread back in October 2017 where several of us were discussing stats on laying the field. I commented that on occasions I've seen tight photo finishes and yet only one horse in the photo had traded odds on. On one occasion the one that traded odds on actually lost in the photo!

I also gave my reasons why I don't believe laying the field is likely to be a succesful strategy long term. Although of course I concede that there will be the odd person around that may have a good angle on it and may be able to make it work.

I've seen so many races where there are several horses in close proximity scrapping out the finish a furlong or so out yet on my screen one may already gone odds on and goes on to win the race narrowly about 30 seconds later. I may have laid the field at 2/1 and expected that I should have got at least 3 matched and broken even only to find perhaps I've only gotten one or two matched resulting in a loss. luckily I've only done it with small stakes.

I also believe from past experience of watching live racing that you get a different picture to watching on tv. I would see a group of horses battling away a furlong out yet you could already see one of them poised and go on to win. I'd watch the replay on the racecourse tv and it would look as if they all had a fairly equal chance.

There are far too many people able to bet live on course these days able to bet literally in the last 50 yards where to live viewers you can see one of the battling horses is the likely winner. I'm not saying they get it right 100% because they don't, but your're at a real disadvantage doing this kind of thing at home with all the picture delays etc.

I've only done this in just over 100 races which is not enough to get a very accurate picture but I would say so far I've been succesful in laying the field about 20% of the time broke even about 30% and lost
the other 50%.

[spreadbetting]

There are far too many people able to bet live on course these days able to bet literally in the last 50 yards where to live viewers you can see one of the battling horses is the likely winner. I'm not saying they get it right 100% because they don't, but your're at a real disadvantage doing this kind of thing at home with all the picture delays etc.

Exactly, obviously they don't always get it right but having a 5+ second advantage over the at home players should be more than enough to get it right more often than wrong. Plenty of those on course players only get involved when they think they know the winner, they're not interested in two or more horses head bobbing all the way to the line, they're fully aware a better opportunity will come along soon enough and keep the powder dry.

I didn't see the race so no idea when the likely winner was known but at that point x-matching plays into their hands so I wouldn't be surprised to see a horse not go under 2's. Also depending on the odds people still give betting preference to the favourites until things become obvious. If you want to bet blindly on laying the fields you should check out which courses give you the best chance i.e. ones with uphill finshes etc and also check out which network it's shown on as ATR courses will always be at a bigger disadvantage.

[Atho55]

I have no idea how the function of me placing a bet in BA then to BF actually works in detail but in a recent post I made re recording odds, I had noticed that the BA "Inplay" was 2-4 seconds behind the actual start time of the race therefore the actual race is over and the same 2-4 seconds before it is registered on BA. If the result of the race is already known by BF then I would imagine the money to match would not be available. Just a thought and I`m sure some of the boffins on here can offer a more accurate explanation.

[Derek27]

I don't know how to post a link to a thread back in October 2017 where several of us were discussing stats on laying the field.

Just right-click on the post title (date & time), copy the link location, and paste it in your new post.

This is the thread: viewtopic.php?p=135988#p135988

[spreadbetting]

I have no idea how the function of me placing a bet in BA then to BF actually works in detail but in a recent post I made re recording odds, I had noticed that the BA "Inplay" was 2-4 seconds behind the actual start time of the race therefore the actual race is over and the same 2-4 seconds before it is registered on BA. If the result of the race is already known by BF then I would imagine the money to match would not be available. Just a thought and I`m sure some of the boffins on here can offer a more accurate explanation.

Without knowing where, or how, you're taking these timings from it's hard to say. In simple terms Betfair are supposed to have a guy on course who puts the market inplay and suspends as the winner crosses the line. I've certainly never seen this 2-4 second delay, are you talking about your bets getting to the market or the you watching the race on TV? Not sure how or what you're timestamping to find this difference to be honest.

[Derek27]

Surely any discrepancy in the clocks would be purely cosmetic ?

If your BA clock is 4 seconds off the actual start time it shouldn't make any difference to the time it takes bets to hit the exchange. Unless you're in a time-warp 4 seconds behind everybody else.

[Atho55]

I record the info via the Bet Angel sheet in Excel which contains the relevant market info including a timer which I suspect is the same time shown on all the BA windows. Alongside this I have my PC time and can take the Actual Race start time from Sporting Life and find exactly when the race started then compare that to the BA time declared as In Play shown sometimes as 00.00.00 or 00.00.01.

Like this

Time delay.png

This looks to be about 3 seconds. So users of BA are firing bets in during those 3 seconds when BF already know the result of the race and that does not include the 1 second delay.

[spreadbetting]

Timestamp the next at Chelmsford and I'll do the same, it could easily be down to your code or internal clock

[Derek27]

If Betfair know the result of a race so does anyone watching the same pictures, it doesn't matter what the clock says. If people are daft enough to place bets on horses that have lost it can only be good news for the rest of us.

[spreadbetting]

Timestamped at 7:31:59 for me , have to wait to see what Sporting Life say

[spreadbetting]

Sporting Life have it down as Off time:19:32:03 so looks like I've invented a time machine and 4 seconds ahead of them and at least 7 in front of you I think we can probably take Sporting Life's timings with a pinch of salt. I'll see what Paddy Power have as I used to scrape those for someone so assume they're more reliable

[Atho55]

Timeform have exactly the same winning time Sporting Life. I`m not sure if it`s the BHA who are responsible for the actual race time as their position on this looks a bit vague.