DOUBLE NUMBERS
" A prediction of the total racecard numbers of all the winners at a meeting, multplied by 2."
I read some guy's editorial in the Racing Post recently where he suggested that the Double Numbers market was a 'fun' market. Oh dear! I took this as a rather ignorant comment and I don't think his series of articles has been progressed.
The DN market first got me interested in spread betting and although quite a time consuming market; is is certainly potentially lucrative once the market is fully understood. Like most spread markets, a mathematical approach is needed and a simple spreadsheet is required to crunch the numbers. It is also necessary to assign a price to every horse at a meeting. This is no small task, but the beauty is that once this has been acheived then it is possible to arrive at a price for every market at a meeting and so is worth the time and effort.
So, how do we arrive at a price for every horse? As a pro-gambler, I have learnt to create my own tissue prices but this is possibly the most intricate and difficult task facing any punter. You could use the RP forecast, but I would suggest that unless you have your own tissue prices (or subscribe to my services) then your best bet is to use the current Betting Exchange prices as a starting point. Depending on your experience, you can adjust these as you see fit. Using the exchange prices, you will quickly be able to see where the spread firms may have got things wrong. and beleive me, they always have somewhere. Anyone who has yet to read Dave Nevison's book 'A Bloody Good Winner' should do so and open a spread betting account today. Spread betting is probably the easiest way of 'beating the system'.
The position of the horse in the racecard is of vital importance in the DN market.
| Racecard No. | Racecard No. | Racecard No. | ||||||
| 1 | 14 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 1 |
| 2 | 14 | 1 | 2 | 20 | 1 | 2 | 20 | 1 |
| 3 | 14 | 1 | 3 | 20 | 1 | 3 | 20 | 1 |
| 4 | 14 | 1 | 4 | 20 | 1 | 4 | 20 | 1 |
| 5 | 14 | 1 | 5 | 20 | 1 | 5 | 20 | 1 |
| 6 | 14 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 1 | 6 | 20 | 1 |
| 7 | 14 | 1 | 7 | 20 | 1 | 7 | 20 | 1 |
| 8 | 14 | 1 | 8 | 20 | 1 | 8 | 2 | 1 |
| 9 | 14 | 1 | 9 | 20 | 1 | 9 | 20 | 1 |
| 10 | 14 | 1 | 10 | 20 | 1 | 10 | 20 | 1 |
| 11 | 14 | 1 | 11 | 20 | 1 | 11 | 20 | 1 |
| 12 | 14 | 1 | 12 | 20 | 1 | 12 | 20 | 1 |
| 13 | 14 | 1 | 13 | 20 | 1 | 13 | 20 | 1 |
| 14 | 14 | 1 | 14 | 20 | 1 | 14 | 20 | 1 |
| 15 | 14 | 1 | 15 | 20 | 1 | 15 | 20 | 1 |
| make up | = 16 | make up | = 12 | make up | = 16 |
Now, if we look at scenario 1 in the first 3 columns, then our average make up will be 16. Although the make up may be anywhere between 2 and 30, our mathematical average is 16 because each possible outcome is equal and so the sum of the possible make up divided by the number of runners is 16.
In scenario 2, we have a short priced horse at number 1 on the racecard with all others being equal. This reduces are mathematical average make up to 12. This makes sense as we expect that a make up of 2 has more chance than any other possibility.
However, if we look at the third scenario - then as the 2/1 fav is now bang in the middle of the card, we have the same situation as in scenario 1, a make up of 16.
All this highlights one very important factor;
The further away any runner from the mid point on the racecard, the bigger the effect on the overall make up of the meeting.
Similarly, in a 3 horse race, the weighting of the race make up on the overall Double Numbers quote will be a lot less significant than our 15 horse race above.
Therefore, you must bear in mind that the tissue prices you assign to those horses at the top and bottom ends of large fields will have a bigger impact. Spend more time iff necessary on such horses and less time on the mid-racecard horses and less time on the small fields.
MATCH BETS
"What will be the distance between two nominated horses in a race at the finish? The maximum distances for the purpose of these bets will be 12 lengths in a Flat race and 15 lengths in a National Hunt race. In this market whole points are divided into tenths."
The lure of a 2-horse race. There are worse strategies than to focus on match bets. Ask Harry Findlay!
This is a fairly simple bet to understand but again, we need to understand the intricacies lurking in the background. Let's consider an example;
HORSE A 3/1 vs HORSE B 3/1 - 2 mile Novice Chase
Match bets can be made up of any two horses that the spread firm decides upon. Commonly these are shorter priced horses in the race.
We might expect that both horses have an equal chance of winning the race as their odds are the same. However, that does not mean that they have an equal chance in the match bet.
Suppose HORSE A is a consistent type but a little quirky. He has to be held up to the last possible moment but he is a sound jumper. HORSE B is a bold front runner will sets off at a fierce pace. Returning to the horses odds, let's suppose that the odds would be calculated thus if these two were the only runners in the race;
HORSE B's chance of winning IF we knew he would jump well = 80%
Chance of HORSE B jumping well 62.5%
Net chance of HORSE B - 80% x 62.5% = 50%
Now, because of HORSE B's bold front running style - he has won his races by an average 10 lengths. HORSE A has an average winning distance of 1 length with his come late style. This is a bit of an over-simplification but to illustrate the point we might expect these distances to be repeated.
So, we have decided that if HORSE A wins he wins by 1 length. This happens 50% of the time.
HORSE B, if he wins, will win by 10 lengths - again 50% of the time.
The average therefore will be a 4.5 length victory for HORSE B (+10l - 1l)/2
This does not complete the picture however. If HORSE B jumps badly 38.5% of the time, then in 8 races he might be expected to win 4 races, get beaten 1 length in 1 race, and fall or finish 10 lengths behind HORSE A 3 times. This gives us a new average of
HORSE B to beat HORSE A by 1.125 lengths.
This is just one quick illustration of how analysing things properley may highlight value in this market.
One other key factor to consider when looking at match bets, especially on the flat;
The average distance between finishers in a 5f race will be much less than over 1m 4f - 2m.
In a 5f handicap, sometimes 10 or more runners may finish within 2 lengths. Not the case with the longer distances. The spread however does not distinguish between distances so the 'margin' of 1 length (1.5 length NH) means that you should avoid match bets over sprint distances and focus on the longer races. Obvious really but the spread firms are not thinking as deeply as they should be!
Dave Nevison's book (a must read for any serious gambler) highlights the fact that taking money of the spread firms is the easiest way to make gambling pay. Trust me, he is not wrong.