G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

0 Members & 366 Non Members

Belmont Saturday 2nd July

West Australian Racing

Comments

  • VorgtrafficVorgtraffic    1,755 posts
    Staeck's stats for this season (10/11): -31.8%

    Last season he was -7.4% however

    All the stats are from R&S
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    edited July 2011
    said:

    This season

    Yuill: -26% P/T
    Pike: -3.6% P/T

    I know who i would rather back.

    your stats are wrong.
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    said:

    I assume its similar to the A/E stat Carey?

    This is all of course assuming that Joe Public gets the odds right on the horses they are riding...


    dunno, depends on what an a/e stat is :lol:

    it depends on who joe public is doesn't it?
    there are joes and then there are joes.
    one lot of joes will find any errors the other joes make, and make the final price much more accurate than it otherwise would have been.

    you only need to check it yourself to prove that is true, provided you have all the TAB divvies.
  • VorgtrafficVorgtraffic    1,755 posts
    said:

    said:

    This season

    Yuill: -26% P/T
    Pike: -3.6% P/T

    I know who i would rather back.

    your stats are wrong.
    Nope!
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    said:

    said:

    said:

    This season

    Yuill: -26% P/T
    Pike: -3.6% P/T

    I know who i would rather back.

    your stats are wrong.
    Nope!
    ok i'm happy for you to believe that, i am wrong wrong wrong. :lol: :lol: :lol:
  • VorgtrafficVorgtraffic    1,755 posts
    That's not a double negative

    Anyway, judging by the number of rides - the stats i posted cover provincial meetings as well i think which could explain the difference

    Ok

    Here is pikes stat for 10/11 at belmont only (sample size of 188 rides)
    -4.8%

    yuills stat for 10/11 at belmont only (sample size of 170 rides)
    -27.4%

    read it and weep!!! :lol:
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    said:

    That's not a double negative

    Anyway, judging by the number of rides - the stats i posted cover provincial meetings as well i think which could explain the difference

    Ok

    Here is pikes stat for 10/11 at belmont only (sample size of 188 rides)
    -4.8%

    yuills stat for 10/11 at belmont only (sample size of 170 rides)
    -27.4%

    read it and weep!!! :lol:

    it would depend entirely on where, when, and for how long.

    i will believe my own records every time, because i know the detail that went into making the data.
    r&s on the other hand i would never trust the detail of. :D

    but, i would not doubt that pike is better than yuill overall, BUT, pike is grossly OVERBET

    so to summarise.....i read it and wept.....................for others! :lol: :lol: :lol:
  • DarkDark    909 posts
    Ive taken this from another site, please let me know if thats not ok:


    The A/E index is an enhanced impact value type stat which can also be used instead of the ROI stat. The A stands for Actual whilst the E stands for Expected and thus the stat shows the index of actual winners to expected winners. Calculating an index this way shows 'value' and thus value bets, and value lays can be easily identified.

    If a stat has 'more winners than expected' then we have found a good thing for backing. If a stat has 'less winners than expected' then we've found a weakness - an indicator of bad 'value' for betting purposes.

    To calculate the A/E index you need to know the actual number of winners and the expected number of winners. The first part is easy as this is the number who actually won. Calculating the expected number of winners is a bit more tricky as you need to sum up the odds of all the runners.

    First, calculate the probability or 'odds' of winning. This is not the odds of the horse such as 5/1 but the odds chance of 5/1. Use the following formula to work out the odds chance:

    Odds of Winning = 1 / (Price + 1)

    If a horse is Evens then his odds chance (or probability) of winning = 1 / (1 + 1) = 0.5
    If a horse is 3/1 then his odds chance of winning = 1 / (3 + 1) = 0.25

    Once you have calculated the odds of each runner you then add all those figures up to obtain the expected number of winners.

    e.g. If we have 100 horses who went off at 3/1 then we would expect 25 of them to win. The odds of a 3/1 shot is 0.25 so adding all 100 of those together = 25.
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    no not like that dt.
    i just used the normal distribution to figure it.
    where i just normalise tab probs to 1 and then figured how many wins they should have had by totalling probabilty.
    variance would be the sum of prob*(1-prob)
    so expected wins, variance, actual wins are used to find the cumulative probabilty which is the f(x)
    if f(x) =.5 they won how many they should have, over .5 means they win more than should have and less than .5 means they are overbet(or are crap riders).

    it's just one of many ways to try and evaluate something, and not necessarily best.
  • DarkDark    909 posts
    Sounds like the end result would be pretty similar :idea:
  • careycarey    6,424 posts
    said:

    Sounds like the end result would be pretty similar :idea:

    yes on rereading yours it is similar.
  • dungydungy    9,278 posts
    Carey your numbers dont lie mate but cmon your comparing an Emu Export to a Corona mate :lol: :lol:
  • danishdanish    96 posts
    corona - overpriced and overhyped mexican dishwashing water
    bush chook - unfair stigma ensures great value for money
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,481 posts
    Corona is voted the worst beer in the world...GREAT marketing tho!! :lol:

    Darkshines, I think you've read "What Are The Odds" by Bill Waterhouse.
    I'm reading atm, I'm mesmerised by it...go and grab a copy, boys..you won't be able to put it down.
    I told Diva that after he finishes it he will feel like hopping on a plane to Sydney just so he can shake the great mans hand, before he goes to that celestial settling room.
  • TheFunksterTheFunkster    3,840 posts
    said:

    corona - overpriced and overhyped mexican dishwashing water

    Totally agree!
    Was in a box at the footy on Sat and arrived to find the pre-ordered eskies were stocked with Corona and Carlton Mid. So I had a water and waited for some decent beer to arrive :wink: :lol:
  • darkshinesdarkshines    2,837 posts
    said:

    Corona is voted the worst beer in the world...GREAT marketing tho!! :lol:

    Darkshines, I think you've read "What Are The Odds" by Bill Waterhouse.
    I'm reading atm, I'm mesmerised by it...go and grab a copy, boys..you won't be able to put it down.
    I told Diva that after he finishes it he will feel like hopping on a plane to Sydney just so he can shake the great mans hand, before he goes to that celestial settling room.

    Lost me there cobber, you mean Dark Target
  • The Gambling Man is a lot more interesting and a lot more accurate
  • thefalconthefalcon    20,481 posts
    Must be the coronas, dark...errr??? :lol:
Sign In or Register to comment.