Thursday, 25 April 2013

Bahrain Grand Prix


As I described in this post, I was going to put imaginary money on the fastest drivers after the Friday free practises, Saturday practise and qualifying to see which betting strategy would gain me the most money over the season.

Fastest Friday PracticePriceFastest Saturday Practice*PriceFastest QualifyingPrice
Raikkonen3/1

Rosberg7/1
Amount won/lost on a £1 bet-£1

Amount won/lost on a £1 bet-£1
Amount won/lost on a £10 bet-£10

Amount won/lost on a £10 bet-£10
Season Total £1 bets-£4Season Total £1 bets£5.75Season Total £1 bets-£0.25
Season Total £10 bets-£40Season Total £10 bets£57.50Season Total £10 bets-£2.50


* Due to fencing, I was unable to check this price.  If it had not been for my beautiful assistant @Tiberius_Jolly, I wouldn't have been able to check the qualifying prices either.

Sunday, 14 April 2013

Chinese Grand Prix


As I described in this post, I was going to put imaginary money on the fastest drivers after the Friday free practises, Saturday practise and qualifying to see which betting strategy would gain me the most money over the season.

Fastest Friday PracticePriceFastest Saturday PracticePriceFastest QualifyingPrice
Massa13/2Alonso3/1*Hamilton2/1
Amount won/lost on a £1 bet-£1Amount won/lost on a £1 bet£4Amount won/lost on a £1 bet-£1
Amount won/lost on a £10 bet-£10Amount won/lost on a £10 bet£40Amount won/lost on a £10 bet-£10
Season Total £1 bets-£3Season Total £1 bets£5.75Season Total £1 bets£0.75
Season Total £10 bets-£30Season Total £10 bets£57.50Season Total £10 bets£7.50


* Due to the time difference and being at fencing, I was unable to check this price before qualifying.

Monday, 25 March 2013

Malaysian Grand Prix

As I described in this post, I was going to put imaginary money on the fastest drivers after the Friday free practises, Saturday practise and qualifying to see which betting strategy would gain me the most money over the season.

Fastest Friday Practice Price Fastest Saturday Practice Price Fastest Qualifying Price
Raikkonen 9/4Vettel 7/4* Vettel 7/4
Amount won/lost on a £1 bet -£1 Amount won/lost on a £1 bet £2.75 Amount won/lost on a £1 bet £2.75
Amount won/lost on a £10 bet -£10 Amount won/lost on a £10 bet £27.50 Amount won/lost on a £10 bet £27.50
Season Total £1 bets -£2 Season Total £1 bets £1.75 Season Total £1 bets £1.75
Season Total £10 bets -£20 Season Total £10 bets £17.50 Season Total £10 bets £17.50


* Due to the time difference, I was unable to check this price before qualifying.

Tuesday, 19 March 2013

Australian Grand Prix

There is html coding in this post so if anything looks off please tell me and I'll try to fix it.  The accent is sadly on the try.

As I described in this post, I was going to put imaginary money on the fastest drivers after the Friday free practises, Saturday practise and qualifying to see which betting strategy would gain me the most money over the season.

Fastest Friday Practice Price Fastest Saturday Practice Price Fastest Qualifying Price
Vettel 5/4 Grosjean 33/1 Vettel 4/7
Amount won/lost on a £1 bet -£1 Amount won/lost on a £1 bet -£1 Amount won/lost on a £1 bet -£1
Amount won/lost on a £10 bet -£10 Amount won/lost on a £10 bet -£10 Amount won/lost on a £10 bet -£10


I think I mentioned that betting was a mug's game, didn't I.


One interesting thing to me was that, after qualifying, the bookies (or at least William Hill) thought that Vettel was unbeatable to point that he was odds on to win.  This would have meant that if Vettel had won, I would have received £5.71 + my stake on a £10 bet (or 57 p on a £1 bet), which, even given his pedigree and the car's pedigree is a pretty major statement for the first Grand Prix of the season.  One that turned out to be wrong.  It'll be interesting to see if the following Grand Prix are as difficult to predict.

Wednesday, 27 February 2013

Beating The Bookies At Formula 1 Betting

Being a jockey is the only thing any member of my family has ever been too tall for.  So, while my great-grandfather never got to be jockey*, I was brought up watching horse racing.  So I know sports betting is a mug's game, because the bookies have an in-built advantage because they get to set the odds and aren't ever going to set them in the punter's favour.

So I don't bet, except for the Grand National, which is enough of a lottery to make a mockery of the odds.

When @psychmedia showed that grid position was strongly positively correlated  with final race position (http://blog.ouseful.info/2013/01/30/f1stats-visually-comparing-qualifying-and-grid-positions-with-race-classification/ and following posts) my interested was piqued.  I have to admit my interests were more ... acquisitive than purely scientific.  When I've asked previously to suggest who to bet on to win a race, I've always said "back whoever qualifies on pole**".  The problem, in terms of betting, is that, while you risk less, you also get less of a reward because whoever gets pole position has their odds slashed.

So, I was thinking about how to improve the rewards without risking too much more.

There are some obvious points during a race weekend when you can place a bet based on what has gone before:

1) After Friday practise.  The obvious problem here is that a lot of teams use Friday practise for long runs, to give their reserve driver some track time, and to test new parts.  Who goes fast on Friday might not tell us anything about who goes fast on Sunday.  The obvious plus is that there should be better odds on offer.

2) After Saturday practise.  The cars are more likely to be in race-ish trim and it's not likely that the reserve drivers will be in any of the cars.  The odds are probably going to be shorter at this point.


3) After qualifying.  The cars will definitely be in race trim because of parc fermé rules, and despite possible fuel and tyre issues, the cars are at a point where position is positively correlated with final performance.  Of course, because of this, the odds will be at their shortest here.

At what point can a conscientious, risk-averse punter best place their money?

That's something that's testable.

If I put some hypothetical*** money on the fastest driver at each of these points, by the end of the year (or 20 replicates), I should be able to see if there's any difference.

Now to some more practical details:

I will be using the William Hill website values to give me the odds I would get.  William Hill were chosen because they're also where I put my National bet on.  I will only use simple bets i.e. x to win at a/b with no additional frills****.

I will put the same amount of "money" on for each bet.  I'm trying to decide whether to put on £1 or £10 because with £1 the result will be clearer but with £10 the differences should be more obvious at the end of the season.

Now to list the foreseeable difficulties:

a) Short time windows for putting the bets on, particularly for putting money on at point 2.  I am one of those people who still doesn't have a smart phone so if I am away from a computer (which will happen because of fencing), I might not be able to put on a bet for that time point.  I might require help from friends.

b) The odds are not calculated from 0 each time.  The bookies aren't stupid*****, they will take into account previous form.  So for instance, even if this season had entirely new regulations, Vettel would be at a shorter price going into the Australian GP than his team-mate.  Form through the season is also going to be weighted so if Racer X wins the first 10 grand prix, his odds are going to get shorter so I will win less money betting on him.  You also have local weighting - William Hill is a British bookies so is more likely to have fans that put money on Hamilton to win because he's the local lad.  As bookies don't want to lose money on popular bets, this is likely to cause them to reduce his odds as well.  This may mean the values I get at the end of the season don't actually reflect the money I could have won if I was betting at a bookies based on Mars.

Comments, suggestions, things I've overlooked?

~~~~

*don't worry, he managed to find a different job with horses.

** except Mark Webber who appears to be cursed.

*** hypothetical because I am not made of money.

**** remind me to write something about how a lot of the additional frills are actually bad for the punter's chance of winning.

***** if anyone ever comes to you with a betting scheme that involves the bookies being stupid, it is a bad plan and will not work.  Run for your life.

Friday, 22 February 2013

Apparently my hypothesis was wrong

The hypothesis I was talking about in the last post was that the reason the 2012 Formula 1 season's racing was closer was due to the lack of blown diffusers, more particularly, I thought that this was because the diffusers and the way they worked (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_1_2011#Rule_changes) aided smoother drivers, or hindered the less smooth.

Now I admit this was mostly based on a gut feeling that Mark Webber was a much better driver than his 2011 results showed, and that, with the removal of the blown diffusers, his results would be closer to Sebastian Vettel's.

Unfortunately, I can't actually prove my hunch with numbers, because, Webber's average placing in 2012 in races where both drivers finished, was actually slightly lower than his position the year before, in comparison to Vettel (on average he was 1.9 places behind Vettel rather than 1.8 places). I blame being Grosjean'd a few times. However, at the same time, he's finished ahead of Vettel more times this season (five times as opposed to twice). I therefore decided that I needed more evidence to back up my theory. Or, you know, prove it at all. I needed another team where one driver is general regarded as smoother than the other and the drivers haven't change between 2011 and 2012.

Bring on the McLarens.

Thankfully, the McLarens actually do bear out my theory, even with Hamilton's various misfortunes.  There's a swing from Hamilton being -0.71 of a position behind in 2011 to being 3.3 of a position ahead in 2012.  The other thing screaming at me is that really, McLaren's reliability issues have really hurt them.  Both Red Bulls finished 16 times, both McLarens finished 10 times.

Unfortunately, I'd planned to use the difference between the Ferraris as a baseline but it turns out that Massa is less capable of coping with a terrible car than Alonso is.

There would be spreadsheets to back this up, but, unfortunately, I've not been able to figure out how to post them into Blogger.  Any help is gratefully received.

Friday, 9 November 2012

F1 Opinions Sought

I have been doing some thinking about blown diffusers, and how they interacted with driving styles, in particular, how smooth a driver is.

I'm also aware that having just me judging how smooth a driver is is not a good idea, and so I've set up a survey on Surveymonkey and I'd be grateful for any responses - http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/LX6WZQD

Monday, 27 August 2012

What's In A Name On A Sports Shirt?


This post was inspired by Jed Thian's post about the New Zealand All Blacks looking for a shirt sponsor - http://cargocollective.com/alternativerugbycommentary/Jedi-s-Blog.

Now those of you that don't follow rugby union might think the above post is a little ... over-the-top.  But it's not.  The idea of the All Blacks is something so strong.  You knew that if your team were coming up against the men in black, inside that shirt would be someone who was probably large and undoubtedly good at rugby.  You knew your lot were in for a beating.

And because New Zealand is a small country, and this is the sport that it is world-class in, it's incredibly important to most New Zealanders.  The other sports teams are named with reference to the rugby union side.  The rugby league team and the sevens team both go by the All Blacks, the cricket team are the Black Caps and the hockey team are the Black Sticks.  And so on, because I know there's a few I've missed.

It's not just a shirt, it's an idea.

I accept that financial needs exist, I'm a realist, but I have my doubts about people who are unable to raise the money on the back of the All Blacks brand as it exists.

It's not like I hate all shirt sponsors, I still think Skint Records sponsoring Brighton and Hove Albion was a nice touch, but that was a case of a sponsor that fitted the team they were sponsoring.

On the other hand, there's something about the idea of the unsponsored team.

If we move to a sport I know better, football, there used to be the ideal of Barcelona, the people's team.  Communal ownership and no shirt sponsor.  A couple of seasons ago (starting in 2006) they put UNICEF's name on their shirts, which, while it looked odd because there were words on the front of Barcelona's shirt all of a sudden, wasn't shirt sponsorship, they were doing it for free, in fact, they were even donating money to UNICEF (~ 1.5 million Euros per year).

But looking back, I can't help but wonder if they were just preparing their supporters for the idea of having a shirt sponsor, because suddenly they have one, the Qatar Foundation For Education, Science and Community Development, which, while I get that Qatar are getting into football (roll on 2022 etc), doesn't really link up with Barcelona's identity of being uncompromising outsiders.

Because part of the attraction of Barcelona was that they were the anti-establishment team, the Catalan champions who happened to play in the Spanish League, the team owned by their fans, the team who never had a shirt sponsor.  And they can't say that any more, they'll never be able to say it again.  Even if, after this, they go back to not having a shirt sponsor, they'll have to asterisk any time they say "the team that never had a shirt sponsor" with *except for seasons 2011-2016.  And that's if they go back to not having one.  It takes the shine off the idea of Barcelona, and I have a terrible feeling it'll do the same to the All Blacks.

Friday, 29 June 2012

Euro 2012 Final

So we're down to 2 teams, and I think it's hats off to the Spanish newspapers who predicted this after the match in the group stages.

Barcelona now contribute the most players, 7, all of whom play for Spain.  Juventus and Real Madrid come next with 6 each.  The only team guaranteed to have a player on the winning side is Manchester City.

Monday, 25 June 2012

Semi Final Time

Thankfully there was only one game that went to penalties.  I know they're probably the least worst method, but that doesn't mean I have to like them.

Semi-final diagram -

It makes sense that Portugal and Spain are locked together, while Germany and Italy hang off the centre, given the number of Portuguese players that play in Spain, and how most of Germany and Italy's players play in the league of their home nation.  Real Madrid still contribute the most players (10).

If you view the diagram as communities, they are Italy, Spain, Germany, Portugal, Real Madrid and Athletico Madrid.  Why the last one I do not know.