Blog
The fatal imbalance that is damaging British racing
By Andrew posted on 06-Feb-12 12:25.
Twitter: @Stephenh61
Email : stephen at bettingexpert.com
In his regular racing editorial, Stephen shares his thoughts on the potential for corruption in British racing as prize money and public interest continues to diminish through the current economic climate.
British Racing is struggling through a long and painful recession, as so many sectors in the entertainment/leisure are, but it's diminishing prize money is having further side effects and increasing the potential for corruption. This has the disastrous outcome of punters losing interest in the sport and preferring to wager on other sports/lotteries etc where they feel they have a real chance of success and not merely playing into an "insiders game".
The problem of race-fixing and stopping horses is not a new one and whenever betting is involved the temptation is there. However the distortion between reward for winning and the possible gains for losing is now so wide that it is hard to believe that it is not occuring on a regular basis.
The all-weather racing has traditionally been very low grade and modest horses racing for prize money less than £1500 for winning. This has been a lethal combination, with at least £500,000 traded per race on the leading betting exchange the disparity of "reward" has not escaped everyone's attention.
In 2007 the highest profile duo so far were banned...
"Jockey Tony Culhane has been suspended for 12 months after an investigation into 37 races in 2003 and 2004."
Another rider, Dean Mernagh, received a nine-month ban, and two unlicensed individuals in Culhane's family were warned off - disqualified. Culhane was found to have breached a rule which forbids aiding or abetting individuals to lay or back horses with the benefit of inside information. Mernagh was found to have communicated inside information for reward.
Those members of Culhane's family punished were his brother-in-law and former jump jockey Gary Lyons, and father-in-law Dave Watkins. All four individuals were found guilty of misleading Jockey Club officers when they were questioned about events. Watkins was warned off for five years for using information received from the two jockeys for gain on betting exchanges, and also passing it on to Lyons.
And then in 2008...
"Jockey Dean McKeown and trainer Paul Blockley have appealed against bans imposed after a British Horseracing Authority corruption probe."
They were found guilty of conspiring with others to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice. McKeown was banned from the sport for four years while Blockley was given a 30-month suspension. The jockey later had his licence revoked after he was found guilty under the non-triers' rule.
Blockley was found guilty of failing to give proper instructions to McKeown to ride a horse on its merits. And a panel ruled the jockey did not ensure four mounts ran on their merits. The trainer's disqualification has been put on hold pending his appeal, which is scheduled to start on 15 December. If their bans are upheld, they will not be allowed to train, ride or own racehorses, work in stables, go racing or have dealings with other licensed people.
The pair, who denied the charges, were accused of being involved with the laying of horses to lose in races between March 2004 and December 2005. The bets in question risked a total of £182,541, but in fact, because every bet was a winner, the overall profit was £61,909. It is the first major BHA anti-corruption case since the Old Bailey race-fixing trial involving former champion jockey Kieren Fallon collapsed in December 2007.
Most recently in December 2011 arguably the biggest scandal to hit the sport...
"Jockeys Paul Doe and Greg Fairley have been banned from racing for 12 years for 'not riding a horse to its merits' after an investigation into corruption."
Two other jockeys are among 11 people barred from the sport following a British Horseracing Authority probe. Kirsty Milczarek has been banned for two years, while Jimmy Quinn has received a six-month punishment. Owners Maurice "Fred" Sines and James Crickmore have been banned for 14 years for betting on their own horse to lose.
Fairley and Doe had both quit racing earlier this year. Quinn and Milczarek were both found guilty of corruption, but the latter was also found to have breached a rule forbidding jockeys passing on information in return for reward. Quinn, who has ridden four winners for champion trainer Richard Hannon this year, does not intend to appeal while Milczarek does.
Five others - Nick Gold, Peter Gold, Shaun Harris, David Kendrick and Liam Vasey - were also found guilty of "corrupt or fraudulent practice". Vasey, Kendrick and Harris were banned for five, four and three years respectively while a decision on Nick and Peter Gold's penalties will be made after further written submissions.
"While it is the names of the jockeys that the racing public will recognise, people should be under no illusions that it is the lesser-known names who were the instigators of these serious breaches of the rules," said BHA director Paul Scotney.
"The investigation uncovered a network through which Sines and Crickmore engaged in betting activity, in particular with two riders, Paul Doe and Greg Fairley, that impacted on seven of the 10 races in question.
"In the BHA's history, the scale and complexity of this case is unprecedented."
So where do we stand?
Some may say that this illustrates that the corruption within racing is being stopped by vigorous investigation. The BHA has certainly upped its game in recent years and the co-operation with betfair has meant proving "guilt" in these cases has clearly become a lot easier. However, the penalties are not strict enough and no deterrant to wrongdoing. Until complete lifetime bans become the norm with severe financial consequences (as in Australia and the Far-east) then the temptation will still prove too strong.
There is little doubt still that some of the wild fluctuations on the exchanges pre-race are not merely down to opinionated punters putting their cash on the line through detailed form analysis. While steps have been implemented to cut down on so-called inside info (i.e the banning of mobile phones in the weighing room), it is still hard to explain some of the rides seen on a daily basis on our all-weather courses in particular. Unfortunately until the BHA actually catches anyone redhanded it is very hard for anyone in the racing media to comment, especially as they rely on the goodwill of riders and trainers to write copy each day. The recent scandal was big news for a few days but has been quietly forgotten about as it suits those in the sport not to highlight what was systematic theft of punters money (that they never saw returned) over a long period of time.
The Problem
The problem lies in a number of areas. Principally racing is funded by the profits that bookmakers make, through a levy, and anything that is bad news for racing is sure to diminish the amount wagered on the sport itself. Therefore all concerned have a vested interest in burying bad news and ignoring corruption. This gravy train has rolled along for many years, with most of the mainstream media on board. The rapid rise of betting exchanges has made this impossible to ignore such is the scale of it (in financial terms) and prize money cuts, less owners in the sport, recession etc etc are all factors that have made the temptation/need to cheat grow. Although this latest BHA action in December is a step in the right direction, it is hard to believe that this is not just the tip of the iceberg.
Solutions
1 - Lifetime bans and massive fines for all those found guilty.
2- Prize money must be increased to an agreed minimum level (as set out by the Horsemans Group). Raised by a super tax on profits made by FB0T's in betting shops and the restructuring of taxes paid by those firms based overseas but trading on British racing (they currently avoid huge sums by relocation to different countries).
3- Far more transparency in the betting exchanges. In the early days of Flutter (the first exchange pre-betfair) it was possible to see who was on the other side of every wager. This might have issues of privacy etc but the idea is a good one. At the moment it is a bit similar to ringing up your stockbroker to buy shares in a company only to buy them from the managing director who is offloading all of his shares because of impending bad news. If punters can see who is doing what and when it might increase confidence in the sport and certainly become harder for wrong-doing to go undetected.
Conclusion
The world of racing has a lot to be proud of and certainly has done well to weather the current financial storm. However, it is an industry based entirely on punter confidence and unless these integrity issues are dealt with severely and rapidly (some of the current enquiries have dragged on for many years) then the share of betting that racing commands will continue to fall. This spiralling vicious circle then in turn leads to lower and lower prize money and logically to a bigger need/incentive to cheat the system.
You can follow Stephen on Twitter @stephenh61
If you enjoyed this article, you might also like:
5 early value selections for Cheltenham Festival 2012
3 books about betting all punters should read
How to bet with BettingExpert's Hot Horses
The Bookmaker vs The Punter in the modern age
10 Betting Facts for Super Bowl 46
By Andrew posted on 01-Feb-12 21:16.
Twitter: @AndrewBexpert
Email : andrew at bettingexpert.com
Who should you bet on for Super Bowl 46? What are some of the historical Super Bowl betting trends? When will the teams score first? All these questions will attempt to be answered as Andrew brings you 10 (or more) Betting Facts for Super Bowl 46.
Facts - Recent form
The Giants have crashed their way through their last 5 games. They have covered the line in each of them, 3 of which they were underdogs. And they haven't just covered, they've been mocking the betting line, covering the line by a combined 81 points across the 5 games.
Over the last 20 seasons, there have been 6 instances of an underdog coming into the Super Bowl having covered the line in a streak of at least their previous 4 games. The record of those underdogs against the line in the Super Bowl was 4-1-1.
Looking at their last 2 games, teams that have won as underdogs in 2 consecutive playoff games to reach the Super Bowl are 4-0 against the line on the big day.
But what does recent form mean for New England? Well since Tom Brady's rookie season, the Patriots are 40-28-1 against the line following a game in which they failed to cover the line. In other words, Brady rarely has two bad games in a row. In other other words, the Pats rebound.
Facts - Toss of the Coin
A coin-toss fact for anyone with a fetish for betting on events that last less than a few seconds - The team representing the NFC has won the coin-toss the last 14 seasons. Surely that can't continue right? I mean, come on. (Yes, I'm being sarcastic.)
Oh and in case you needed any more persuading - The last AFC team to win the coin-toss? Yes, you guessed it - The Patriots - way back in Super Bowl 31 against Green Bay.
The following coin-toss stat comes with thanks from the National Football Post and it's a pretty good one. Since Tom Brady's season ending ACL injury in 2008, the Patriots have played 65 games. In 28 of those games they won the coin-toss and on each occasion they chose to kick-off.
Which is why the Giants are around odds of 1.50 to receive the ball first on Sunday.
Facts - Favourites, Dogs & Overs & Unders
So here's some breakdowns of each of the 4 combinations Super Bowls have played out with regards to favourites, underdogs & Over/Under results :
Favourites cover with the game going Over - 14 times.
Underdogs cover with the game going Over - 8 times.
Favourites cover with the game going Under - 10 times.
Underdogs cover with the game going Under - 10 times.
Yes, there's been 45 Super Bowls and those numbers only add up to 42. Well, Super Bowl 1 didn't have an Over/Under and there have been 2 Super Bowls where the line result was a push. So there you go, the most common combination has been the favourite covering coupled with the Over.
But here's the real tasty stat - in the last 29 Super Bowls, the combination of favourite coupled with the Under has occurred just 3 times. That's just a strike rate of just over 10%. But however, it occurred recently, twice, in back to back seasons, Super Bowl 40 and Super Bowl 41.
Facts - When will they score?
Ok, so now something for in-play punters - When can we expect the teams to score? I've broken down both teams in terms of points scored and conceded for each qtr of each game this season. Here's what is interesting.
- The Patriots best qtr for scoring was the 2nd, while the 1st qtr was their worst.
- The Giants best qtr for scoring was the 4th, while the 3rd qtr was their worst.
- In terms of defense, both teams shared the 3rd qtr as their best for limiting the opposition.
- Similarly, both teams shared the 4th qtr as their worst for limiting opposition scoring.
So what does this mean? Well it might be that we can expect not much action straight after halftime with both the Pats and Giants defenses being at their best and the Giants offense being at it's worst.
But it might heat up in the 4th with both defenses giving up points and the Giants having their best offensive production in the final qtr.
When will the 1st score of the game be?
A mildly scientific method I applied came to the conclusion that the 1st score will occur with 9.14 remaining in the 1st qtr. How did I come up with that? Don't worry. Some methods are best left unknown.
Facts - Chances of a Blowout
When we take a look at the history of Super Bowls where the line has been between 2.5 and 4 points, we see something striking.
In Super Bowl history their have been 13 such games. That's approximately 29% of all Super Bowls played. In those 13 games, 10 have ended with a margin of at least 10 points. And in 5 of those 10, it was the underdog that ended up winning by the double digit margin.
To go a step further, 7 of those 13 games ended with a winning margin of at least 17 points.
Also in the last 15 Patriots games where they were favoured with the line between 2.5 and 4, the winning margin for either team was at least 10pts in 9 of those 15 games, while for the Giants when underdogs in the same range, the winning margin for either team has been at least 10pts in 8 of their last 15 such matches.
Facts - Considering 2011 Win/Loss records
New England finished the regular season with a 13-3 record, collecting 4 more wins than the Giants who finished 2011 with a modest record of 9-7. Should the Giants win on Sunday they will be the 1st team to win a Super Bowl with a mere 9-7 regular season record.
However, the Patriots combined opponent strength of schedule was a winning pct of just 47.3%, while the Giants had the 2nd toughest strength of schedule in the league, a combined winning pct of 55.9%.
Further, when we consider playoff rankings of teams in previous Super Bowls, the results have been interesting. Over the last 15 Super Bowls, the lower ranked team is 12-1-2 against the line. If we consider the last 10 seasons, the lower ranked teams are 8-1 against the line, with the New Orleans v Indianapolis game being the only 1st seed Super Bowl meeting in the last 10 seasons.
Facts - In-Season pay back
The Patriots hosted the Giants back in Week 9 of this season where the Giants prevailed in a 24-20 thriller. But that shouldn't worry anybody prepared to bet on New England.
Why?
Because since 2000 when Bill Belichick became coach, when the Patriots have lost to an opponent then played them again later within the same season, they have gone 13-3 against the line in the re-match. An impressive 81% win rate. Yes, Belichick is the master of adjustments and the Patriots have often caught Vegas lines napping when coming up against teams that got the better of them earlier in the season during the Belichick era.
Facts - Going against quality opposition
New England played just 3 teams that ended the season with a win/loss record above 50% - Pittsburgh, the Giants and the Ravens in the AFC Championship game. In all 3 games the Patriots failed to cover the line. And they failed large, with a combined line margin of -28 over the 3 games.
Meanwhile, the Giants survived a savage schedule that included New Orleans, New England, NY Jets, Atlanta, Dallas twice, San Francisco twice and Green Bay twice. Hell. Oh and they managed to go 8-2 against the line in those 10 games. No small effort.
Facts - Big Overs
The Over/Under line for the game began at 55pts. That tied for the 2nd biggest O/U line in Super Bowl history. The game it tied with? The last time these two teams met in the Super Bowl back in 2007/2008. Then the teams combined for just 31 points.
The line has now settled at around 53/54pts. Since 1994 there have been 7 Super Bowl O/U lines above 50 points. In 5 of those the game went Under.
And both teams are coming into this game with very contrasting O/U trends - the Giants have gone Under in 5 of their last 6 games while the Patriots have gone Over in 7 of their last 8 games. Something's got to give.
Oh and for people thinking of betting the 1st qtr Over/Under - The 1st qtr has gone Under in 8 of the last 10 Super Bowls. The 1st qtr O/U on Sunday is 10.5pts.
Facts - First to 23?
Obviously the key to winning and to covering the line is to score points. "Yeah, thanks Einstein."
But here's an interesting stat (and most likely a useless one) - And it revolves around the number 23.
When a team scored at least 23 points in the Super Bowl, they are 31-9-2 against the line. When they score less than 23 points, they are 12-34-2.
And in Super Bowls where at least one team scored 23 points, the game has gone Over 21-13.
You can follow Andrew on Twitter @AndrewBexpert
Listen to Andrew talk Super Bowl betting on Matt Finnigan's Podcast
And follow Matt on Twitter : @MattFinnigan
If you enjoyed this article, you might also like:
An Infographic - The History of Super Bowl Betting
What are the key numbers in NFL line betting?
Who wins when a NBA game goes into overtime?
Where does the value go when an NFL line moves?
The History of Super Bowl Betting
By Andrew posted on 30-Jan-12 17:56.
Twitter: @AndrewBexpert
Email : andrew at bettingexpert.com
What were the bettling lines for every Super Bowl ever played? What were the Over/Under lines? Today on the blog we answer both of these questions as we present to you - The History of Super Bowl Betting.
With less than a week to go until the New England Patriots and New York Giants square off in Super Bowl 46, it's a perfect time to take a look back at previous Super Bowl results - And most importantly, historical betting lines, both head to head and over/under.
The chart below displays all lines, both head to head & over/under, plus fulltime results from the 1st Super Bowl almost 50 years ago, all the way to last year's matchup between Green Bay and Pittsburgh. The lines in green are lines that were covered by the favoured team, while lines in red were covered by the underdogs. Similarly, over/under lines in green were covered, while over/under lines in red were not.
And so without much more to add, I give to you The History of Super Bowl Betting....chart.
Enjoy.
Feel free to embed this infographic by copying the following code:
You can follow Andrew on Twitter @AndrewBexpert
If you enjoyed this article, you might also like:
Warm weather NFL teams going cold late in the season
What are the key numbers in NFL line betting?
Do west coast NFL teams under perform when travelling east?
Where does the value go when an NFL line moves?
5 Pointers for the 2012 Cheltenham Festival
By Andrew posted on 27-Jan-12 16:41.
Twitter: @Stephenh61
Email : stephen at bettingexpert.com
Where is the early value at this years Cheltenham Fesitval? With the festival just a month away, in our new regular racing editorial, BettingExpert's racing analyst Stephen shares his thoughts and tells us which horses are deserving of your investment at Cheltenham this year.
With March now a month away, NH racing fans begin to feel that eager sense of anticipation as the highlight of the entire season gets ever closer. With running plans not cast in stone for many of the protagonists it is essential to bet with a layer offering the valuable "non runner no bet" stipulation.
We have selected five wagers to add to your ante-post portfolio that can provide a vital edge when the festival begins. This will hopefully put BettingExpert followers in a strong position on the day.
1- BIG BUCKS
8-13 WILLIAM HILLS - World Hurdle ***** WIN
The champ has continued in unstoppable fashion this season, extending his winning run to 14. Any slight doubts about his going right handed swept away last time as he was always travelling smoothly for most of the way, just shaken up briefly as the leader pressed on 3 out, soon covering that move and powering away in the straight, not needing to be anywhere near his best but impressive in the manner of victory and remaining very hard to oppose so far as another World Hurdle bid is concerned. This is a short price but 8-13 may seem very fair on the day and it is hard to see any of the present geneartion getting him off the bridle.
2-GRUMETI
10-1 BETFRED TOTE - Triumph hurdle ** EACH-WAY
He was useful on the flat and was unfortunate not to follow up his Taunton win last time at Newbury. He remains a serious contender for the Triumph Hurdle, travelling strongly all the way and 8 lengths up and cruising when he fell 2 out, looking none the worse afterwards. He appeals as by far the best English juvenile seen out and with recent history suggesting the Irish challenge may come up short, he is well worth an each-way investment at this stage.
3-LONG RUN
5-2 General price - Gold Cup **** WIN
Beaten twice this season by his old foe but still appeals as the one to beat, and this course plays to his stamina strengths. Last time he confirmed the positive impression created at Haydock and lost nothing in defeat against one of the outstanding chasers, beaten fair and square but still with every chance of gaining a second win in the Gold Cup, his form and that of the winner head and shoulders above that of any of their likely rivals at the moment, tactics plus less fluent (but not poor) jumping making a difference to this outcome, closing strongly come the end after Kauto Star had essentially sealed the race when pressing on after the twelfth, the longer trip at Cheltenham more in his favour than the winner's.
4-AL FEROF
13-2 Coral - Arkle *** WIN
Finished a very creditable third behind Somersby in the VC Chase at Ascot recently and will be suited by this stiffer course if renewing rivalry. He appeals as sure to be shorter on the day if choosing this option and is a young, unexposed chaser firmly on the upgrade. He didn't look himself beforehand last time, not taking the eye and appearing as if he'd be sharper with the run behind him, and he was a little flat at various stages of the race, nevertheless running right up to form against much more experienced chasers-he remains a very strong contender for the Arkle at Cheltenham, for which he's likely to be trained to the minute; he responded well when pushed along and had every chance in the straight, going less well than the other pair and having to give best before the last.
5-CINDERS AND ASHES
12-1 General price - Supreme Novice Hurdle ** WIN
Won readily in the deep ground last time out but trainer Donald McCain reported he would do far better on a decent surface and appeals as the value choice in a race he has been targeted at all season. He continues to make an excellent impression and looks firmly on target for the Supreme after another easy win, not actually having to improve to land this Grade 2 contest with only 2 in opposition but once more most impressive in landing the odds, jumping and travelling most fluently again and firmly in control when flattening the last, just kept up to his work.
Best Wishes with all your festival wagers and please watch out daily for the Hot Horses that provide exclusive information about what is being supported by the warmest accounts with the major firms.
You can follow Stephen on Twitter @stephenh61
If you enjoyed this article, you might also like:
3 books about betting all punters should read
How to bet with BettingExpert's Hot Horses
10 horses to follow this National Hunt Season
The Bookmaker vs The Punter in the modern age
Who wins a NBA game when it goes into overtime?
By Andrew posted on 24-Jan-12 12:28.
Twitter: @AndrewBexpert
Email : andrew at bettingexpert.com
Which team is more likely to win when a NBA game goes into overtime? The home team? The favourites? The underdogs? As the NBA season is in full swing, today on the blog Andrew takes a look at the question.
Over the last 10 NBA seasons, roughly 6% of games have extended to overtime. Today on the blog I take a look at what happens when a NBA game does head into the extra period. Who is more likely to win? Do home clubs excel in overtime? Do underdogs fall away when going into extended minutes? I will try to answer each of these questions and more.
Home vs Away
Firstly let's do a simple home v away breakdown. Over the last 10 NBA seasons, home clubs won just under 52% of all overtime games. When the game went into a single overtime period, home clubs were consistent, winning just under 52% of games.
When the game went into double overtime, road clubs won 51% of the time, although the sample size was just 100 games played.
Lastly, though an even smaller sample size, home clubs were far superior when a game went into triple overtime, winning just under 71% of the time.
Home favourites vs Away favourites
But let's get into some betting analysis. The chart below shows the overtime winning percentages for both home favourites and away favourites over the last 10 NBA seasons.
As we can see, when the home club starts the game as favourites, they win in overtime just over 56% of the time. This was over a sample size in excess of 500 games.
You might have thought that home underdogs would do better, but over the last 10 NBA seasons, away favourites have beaten home dogs in overtime just over 57% of the time, across a sample size of over 200 games.
Favourites big & small
Ok, now let's dig a little bit deeper. The chart below shows the overtime winning percentages of both home favourites and away favourites grouped by rank of favouritism.
We can see that when home clubs started the game as a favourite of at least 9 points, when the game went to overtime, they won just over 72% of the time. When home clubs started favourites between 6 and 8.5 points, they won in overtime just over 61% of the time.
The most interesting observation is that when the game's starting betting line was between home clubs as favourites of at most 5.5 points all the way down to the away club being favourites of at most 2.5 points, the match was pretty much a 50-50 proposition when heading into extra time. In these situations, the home clubs won in overtime just over 49% of the time the last 10 NBA seasons. And importantly, these games consituted roughly 50% of all overtime games played over that span.
Finally, when away clubs started favourites of at least 3 points up to favourites of 6 points, they won in overtime just under 57% of the time, while when away clubs were favourites of at least 6.5 points, they won in overtime over 77% of the time.
So what did we learn?
Well for one thing we learned that while home favourites of 6 points or more and away favourites of 3 points or more win at a reasonably expected rate, there is a sweet spot inbetween where overtime games are a bit of a coin toss.
We also can see that away favourites tend to do a little bit better than home favourites. For example, home club favourites of at least 6.5 points won in overtime just under 66% of the time, while away favourites of the same kind won in overtime over 77% of the time.
You can follow Andrew on Twitter @AndrewBexpert
If you enjoyed this article, you might also like:
Who wins the deciding set in men's tennis?
What are the key numbers in NFL line betting?
When is the 1st goal scored in a Premier League match?
How often do clubs come from behind from halftime in the Premier League?
Where does the value go when an NFL line moves?
Showing 1 - 5 of 320 posts
< Previous 1 [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] Next >
| 
|
Never risk money you can't afford to lose!