Some Proof That There Is No Such Thing As A Sure Thing!


Just a quick post to show an example that no matter how certain something looks like happening, it is never a sure thing.

Yesterday I posted the following as one of my eachway selections:

Wolverhampton – 16:30 – Strophic – 13/2 – Bet365 (Result - 4th - SP - 9/2)


The picture at The top of this post shows that  Strophic actually traded at 1.04 in running on the win market.


Getting beaten when trading at 1.04 is no great shakes, but what I found fascinating (and costly) was that Strophic:

DID NOT EVEN PLACE.


Hi hope you have enjoyed this post


Stay Patient
Mark

6 comments:

  1. Hi Mark,

    It just shows there is no such thing as a certainty - and even after it has crossed the line you have to worry there may be a stewards' enquiry. It is disappointing to have a horse touch such a price and not win let alone not place. I generally try to lay my speculative wagers at 1.10 in-play (the win market) as an insurance policy as there is nothing worse than not collecting a big pay day when a horse touches those odds. Interesting to hear anyone elses views on that subject as I see Green All Over blog had mentioned it before.

    Regards,
    Jason

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Jason

    Thanks for feedback, I know other punters that do exactly the same as you and lay at really low odds so as to avoid such a 'gubbing'.

    I have never really paid much attention to that sort of insurance bet, but you can bet that I will now. I will have to click on one of my blogs links to the green all over blog now, to see if I can find what Cassini had to say on the subject.

    Mark

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Mark,

    Cassini said that he would generally not lay any bet even at extremely short odds if it wasn't value to do so. The problem with in-play betting on a horse race is that you don't really have time to appreciate what is value or not - when you have seconds to make a decision. I guess in the long-term it is best to just go with the win bet without laying. However, I think maintaining a winning/confident run is very important. It keeps me in a positive frame of mind and that reaps further rewards. I have had bets in the past to win over 1,500 pounds and they have touched 1.03 etc and lost - not only potentially huge winnings but the stake money, too. I thought after a couple of those that I wouldn't sit and suffer the consequences again. I think if a horses touched 1.05 or less (on big money wins I go for 1.10) and not laying such a bet in-running, which goes on to be beaten, is boardering on madness. If it isn't - it will drive you crazy thinking about it afterwards. Who is to say what is value or not. If it wins and you give some back - well so be it. If it loses but you win the same money because you layed the bet at huge odds on then you think 'thank the Lord for that'. I feel happier in knowing that I haven't been robbed. It is interesting how people vary on such a subject - but like the article I published the other day - it is all about finding your comfort zone. If an insurance policy works in matters of life and death, perhaps it is wise to have it in gambling too.

    Regards,
    Jason

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Jason

    I can see that Cassini is correct in terms of purely numerical thinking, but as you say, the affect on our psychological welfare when this sort of thing happens can be massive.

    I believe that with this sort of situation, there is no right or wrong answer, it is in fact a grey area where the decision to lay off or not will be totally up to each individual based on their own tolerance to risk.

    Thanks for such a in-depth and thought provoking comment.

    Mark

    ReplyDelete
  5. My ears were burning. (Mustn't answer the phone when ironing...). In a perfect world, it is right not to trade out just because you can, and only when it is value to do so, but when you don't have time on your hands, I can quite understand laying off as insurance, especially when you backed at odds against and you can lay at 1.0x. I don't do the horses, but if you can lay at 1.04 after backing at 5.9, I don't think anyone could argue that the true price was 1.03 so you should have stuck with it!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Cassini

    Who told you we were talking about you??

    Seriously though thanks for taking the time to comment.

    You are of course correct that in a perfect world you should not trade out and in the past I never have with this sort of bet, It's just that after results like this one, making the decision to loose a few clicks worth of value to protect a big win does hold out a lot of appeal to me.

    Thanks again
    Mark

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.