Remarkable odds movement

[milfor]

The odds of The Wayward Lord (17:20 Market Rasen) went down from 25 in
the morning to 2.82 at the moment. In its only race the horse finished 14th
from 16.

Do you think there is criminal activity involved or how is this possible?

[doris_day]

Just look at the amounts traded at the higher prices. They are tiny. I think some people simply got it wrong at the beginning and the numbers are so small its very unlikely there is anything criminal going on.

[milfor]

Yes, but isn't it fishy that a horse with such a poor performance is the favourite?

[silver]

NHF races are for unproven runners aren't they. His form profile is comparable to the other competitors.

It's been 229 days since Wayward Lord last ran and gave bad performance so that's plenty of time to develop and perhaps news has trickled through that he's in good shape.

I'm not saying I believe he is, by the way.

[milfor]

Another example: Sri Kuantan (5:30 Lingfield) has the following results in the last 6 races:
5 times last, once next to last. And now it's the 2nd favourite.

Do you still claim that there is nothing fishy going on? Come on ...

[silver]

I suppose it depends what counts as fishy.

I believe market manipulation happens on Betfair routinely, so perhaps it has been manipulated into a steam at the present time and will drift out later, nearer start time. I don't consider that fishy myself, except that it's instigated by 'sharks'

Or, perhaps its position in the betting represents a belief that it's in this race to win and its previous lacklustre performances have been part of a dastardly campaign to get it favourably handicapped for today!

[milfor]

Thankfully it is a non-runner in the meantime.
Any hints how such manipulations can be anticipated?
Or are losses now and then because of that inevitable?

[silver]

If you made a loss on the runner because the price was trading shorter than you expected, perhaps you need to reassess the aspects of your method which led you to believe that the price would be much higher.

I suppose one way to verify market prices is to compare them to tissue prices and look closely at any significant discrepancies. Of course, that will only be really useful if the tissue prices are well-informed, up-to-date and created without bias or agenda.

If there is a general method to forensically assess market data and reliably determine when a price is higher or lower than it 'should' be (and later will be) I'd like to know too! If I figure it out, I'll PM you from my yacht

[milfor]

If you made a loss on the runner because the price was trading shorter than
you expected, perhaps you need to reassess the aspects of your method
which led you to believe that the price would be much higher.

You say that it's the error of my method. But I can't imagine a method that
anticipates that a horse that only finished last until now could maybe have
odds below 4.

[silver]

The price a competitor trades at won't always be fairly and rationally linked to it's actual probability of winning. That might approximately be the case in a mature market close to the time the event begins, but it's often far from the case when the market is in its formative stages.

Sometimes that might be because there is genuine uncertainty about the competitors' true chances but often an absence of significant precedent trades enables traders/bettors to get bets matched despite their offered / requested odds being grossly unfair.