21–30 of 63 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly this. You also need to ensure that the underpriced bet actually wins or, if your strategy allows for it, places in the top 3. The odds on a place are generally too low to make this worth it though.
Value is value, doesn’t matter if it wins, its all a numbers game.
He has this completely wrong. The idea in pare-mutuel betting is not to pick the winner. The favorite usually wins, but the house cut makes betting the favorite a net lose. The goal is to find underpriced bets, where the collective estimate of the odds is far from the prediction systems's estimate.
In this case there is no house. For this to work a player needs to be able to back or lay an outcome. "In harness racing, you are playing against all the other players. You are not playing the house. The odds of any given horse winning is directly related to the amount of money on it."
FWIIW the author is wrong that this problem is unstudied. There are actual hedge funds which do nothing but this and a quick google search provides numerous academic examples; even a github repo. "Deep learning" is probably the worst approach I can think of to the problem.
I'm also guessing he misunderstood the data if betting on the favorite compounds like that. If you make the race pay off at something other than the actual odds, that would probably do it.
Examples from the literature:
https://github.com/dominicplouffe/HorseRacingPrediction
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016792361...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case there is no house. For this to work a player needs to be able to back or lay an outcome. "In harness racing, you are playing against all the other players. You are not playing the house. The odds of any given horse winning is directly related to the amount of money on it."
I'm pretty sure these races are pari-mutuel where the house takes a vigorish. The sentence you give is basically the definition of pari-mutuel without the vig. FWIIW the author is wrong that this problem is unstudied. There are actual hedge funds which do nothing but this and a quick google search provides numerous academic examples; even a github repo. "Deep learning" is probably the worst approach I can think of to…
Also. The simulated betting on on the favourite on those 26000 races was with one dollar per race. If the favourite win, the balance increases with 1$*the odds. If the favourite does not win, the balance decreases with 1$. Nothing strange about it, and as I tried to explained, no compounding involved. Flat betting. 1 $ per race. Anyway. It was simulated on historic data and also a side note as it didn’t really have anything to do with the project itself. Appreciate the comment.
I found this nugget to be the most valuable: Simulated flat betting 1$ on 26 000 races over 15 years shows a hefty return on investment If this is true, why don’t we all just go and hire people in Sweden to put in bets for us at the last minute, based on the favorite horse, and pay them out of the profits? We pay them to do it and we collect the winnings. If this strategy works it may work elsewhere too. Why not just…
well, for once, just because it works it doesn't mean it's worth it. a couple of years ago i read a story about a man who cracked a scratch-off lottery ticket code (the serial numbers were biased). he could have earned more than with his day job if he devoted his time fully to gaming the system, but ... it decided it wasn't good enough - a mindless, robotic task, ending in misery soon. the take away of the story was…
This is another case where being rich lets you get richer. :) I had a friend who had a private box at a horse track. One of the benefits of this box was that you had a personal betting machine. This let you bet on the best odds just seconds before the race every time. I made a lot of money doing that. You can kind of do it in Vegas too because the sports books aren't usually that busy. In fact, that hardest part of t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure these races are pari-mutuel where the house takes a vigorish. The sentence you give is basically the definition of pari-mutuel without the vig. FWIIW the author is wrong that this problem is unstudied. There are actual hedge funds which do nothing but this and a quick google search provides numerous academic examples; even a github repo. "Deep learning" is probably the worst approach I can think of to…
It doesn’t say that horse racing is understudied. It is saying that harness racing is understudied. Normal horse racing is very different to harness racing. Also. The simulated betting on on the favourite on those 26000 races was with one dollar per race. If the favourite win, the balance increases with 1$*the odds. If the favourite does not win, the balance decreases with 1$. Nothing strange about it, and as I tried…
I spent a few years in a hedge fund building algorithmic trading strategies, and whenever I saw a graph (we called them 'account curves') like that, it inevitably meant that there was a bug somewhere. Usually the strategy is somehow non-tradable, either because the market is closed or the system is borrowing data from the future.
The graph shows you making about $55,000 over 26,000 races (i.e. about a 100% return) with no big swings. If the effect was that big, wouldn't people know about it already? Despite the fact that you can't apply the strategy everywhere, couldn't you settle for making a little money at your local betting shop?
Your theory is that there are more informed bettors betting at the last minute. That suggests that the market odds spike towards the 'correct' odds as betting is about to close. If someone proposed your 'bet on the favourite' strategy to me, I would have asked to see evidence of that spike. Are you able to get access to real-time odds to test the theory?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure these races are pari-mutuel where the house takes a vigorish. The sentence you give is basically the definition of pari-mutuel without the vig. FWIIW the author is wrong that this problem is unstudied. There are actual hedge funds which do nothing but this and a quick google search provides numerous academic examples; even a github repo. "Deep learning" is probably the worst approach I can think of to…
It doesn’t say that horse racing is understudied. It is saying that harness racing is understudied. Normal horse racing is very different to harness racing. Also. The simulated betting on on the favourite on those 26000 races was with one dollar per race. If the favourite win, the balance increases with 1$*the odds. If the favourite does not win, the balance decreases with 1$. Nothing strange about it, and as I tried…
This is another case where being rich lets you get richer. :) I had a friend who had a private box at a horse track. One of the benefits of this box was that you had a personal betting machine. This let you bet on the best odds just seconds before the race every time. I made a lot of money doing that. You can kind of do it in Vegas too because the sports books aren't usually that busy. In fact, that hardest part of t…
The closer to the off the more accurate the price is (wisdom of the crowd) thus less value, you need to know something others don’t to win long term from taking the starting price! I assume you are American as everyone in the UK has a personal betting machine and it’s in their pocket.
That said, the state's take-out is so high in most states that you need a massive edge to actually make money. The slight edge a private betting machine would bring probably isn't enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn’t say that horse racing is understudied. It is saying that harness racing is understudied. Normal horse racing is very different to harness racing. Also. The simulated betting on on the favourite on those 26000 races was with one dollar per race. If the favourite win, the balance increases with 1$*the odds. If the favourite does not win, the balance decreases with 1$. Nothing strange about it, and as I tried…
I don't mean to sound rude, but I don't believe the results in your $1 * 26000 races graph. I spent a few years in a hedge fund building algorithmic trading strategies, and whenever I saw a graph (we called them 'account curves') like that, it inevitably meant that there was a bug somewhere. Usually the strategy is somehow non-tradable, either because the market is closed or the system is borrowing data from the futu…
Also, I dont suggest anyone go out and place real money on anything like this.
The main point of the article is that its not that hard to get the basics of machine learning and actually doing things with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Value is value, doesn’t matter if it wins, its all a numbers game.
There's no payout if the horse doesn't win. It doesn't operate like the stock market.
The odds reflect the horse's supposed chance of winning or placing (or whatever else it takes to get a payout), not its expected position -- so this isn't a case where you can be aware that the horse is underrated, but have no way to make a +EV bet on that knowledge.