Confirmation Bias

One of the biggest traps that any punter can fall into is having a and punting on a matter of Confirmation Basis and by Trocco, it’s a difficult habit to shake. If we go to the interweb and find out the definition of Confirmation Bias it is,

“Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes”.

Remember that piece of toast that always fell on the floor buttered side down?

And confirmation bias is one of the major reasons the 5S punting methodology trys to steer you in the direction of not listening to pundits or watching more panel shows on racing looking for winners. I also say don’t read too many newspapers especially during the Spring Carnival. You will be fed all types of tripe.

So What is Confirmation Bias?

1. Only remembering facts that support our beliefs

2. Disregarding information that contradicts our beliefs

3. Failing to seek out objective (non biased) information

4. Deliberately misinterpreting information that contradicts our beliefs

So in the opinion of your humble author? It is, the absolute tosh about backing the roughie in a small field, absolute tosh. This is how confirmation bias works, when there is actually a roughie that wins in a small field, the radio racing presenter, the television host, your mate having a punt with you and the Parish priest will all pop up with this pearl of wisdom, “the roughie always wins in a small field”. Not only does it not always win, it rarely wins. But in your mind it always happens because every Tom, Dick and Harriet tells you so and it convinces your inner brain it must be true. That is confirmation bias.

In our Open Maiden 1600 metres race at Class C and Class D meetings on a track rated Good 3 or Good 4, there have been 17 races where the number of contestants was 6,7 or 8. Of the 17 races there was ONE winner that started at $26.00.  Even in this race where Jumpin’ Jaguar won at $26.00, there another runner at $26 and others at $31, $41 and $51. Even the roughie was not even the roughie. The second longest priced winner was $10.00.

It’s (they’re) Due

What about “it’s due”. A jockey has had a run of outs, a trainer has had a run of outs and they are now riding or training a runner you like. You place extra validity on the chances of your selection because your jockey or trainer “is due”. Rubbish! The jockey may have been beaten in close finishes and/or ridden some great rides and come second many times so why is he due? The trainers last 20 runners may have been contested by the 10 worst horses in his stable so why is he due? Both are not due. They are no more likely to win on this ride or trained horse in this race than even the if both jockey and trainer had won their previous race. Every race is an unique event and has no bearing on the next race.

The worst piece of confirmation bias about being due? Don’t ever think that YOU are due. Don’t ever justify having a bet for this reason. The only thing that you can do when you think you “are due” is to be sure that you are due to have a spell from the punt.

Conversely, don’t ever place any credence on the fallacy “this jockey/trainer is flying” without doing some due diligence. A jockey or trainer in form can be a bonus to your selection but only if your selection has a chance of winning anyway. An in form jockey cannot improve the performance of a poor horse that has no chance by enough to make it win. The in form trainer cannot make his worse horse win just because his two or three best horses or well placed horses have been winning races. If you want to do some more research on this simply explore “Recency Bias”.

One of the reasons that I have so many stables and those are the differently named stables I went through previously is that I do not want to rely on getting stuck with relying on one or two particular strategies to select winners. I want to back up any strategy with facts, facts that are contained in the data I collect and analyse. Even then, nothing is due. It is also the reason that you, like me, should record your bets and while analysing the results, give more time to the reasons some selections do not win rather than concentrating on the selections that win.

30% of favorites win and I say that it is better to look at it as saying 70% of favorites lose. Critical thinking, self assessment and talking to other punters about your losses will help you more in future punts than basking in the glory of previous victories.

These conversations are not conversations that will clutter your mind. They will help you continually apply red tags to information that you have come to accept in your previous punting phase. Here, we are continuing to apply Continuous Improvement.

Continuous Improvement.

The “whys” can help us again here.

Why do I automatically agree with some information I receive?

Why do I react differently to information I do not agree with?

Why do I sort information this way?

Our mind is a tricky thing so asking yourself the “whys” and other questions before placing a bet can also help you back winners but it will certainly help with what should be our number one aim, not losing.

Fact Based Bias

Trainers and Jockeys

In the four years since keeping records, one thing continues to stand out and that is that the top fifteen or sixteen trainers and the top fifteen to sixteen jockeys win about 33% of all maiden races. That is a fact that is ignored at your own peril.

The top trainers on provincial courses will normally be the same top trainers in terms of success as on Metropolitan tracks but when it comes to jockeys you need to look a little lower on the Metropolitan Premiership table to find the top fifteen maiden winning hoops.

If you don’t want to keep your own records for trainers and jockeys, our second favourite website can supply information on these important members of the racing community. At racingaustralia.horse on the home page just find the button “PREMIERSHIPS” and take some interesting information from there. The tables there show the results for all races and on the Country table, you can estimate that between a third and a half of the jockeys wins are from the maidens.

The records that I keep for the jockeys and trainers are different from the Premiership tables. What I do with the jockey and trainer information is compare their wins at the different distances to the number of overall wins. I also keep their wins by month, adding together the wins from each month in each year together. They do repeat on a constant basis.

I can also see at a glance which trainer and jockey combine for many of the wins.

It should be noted that jockeys do not tend to stick with maiden runners and I can only put this down to them looking for winners and wanting the best available chance in each race they ride so they quickly get off the slow ones.

So, does the jockey and trainer or combination of both have an effect on my judicious selections? No, it does not but it may have an effect on the size of my unit. A good jockey and trainer combination, that have a good record at the track and over the distance and possibly if they both rate highly in that month may be one of the few times I will digress from my standard betting rules.

The other piece of information that I tend to consider when using the preparer and postilion information is the First Start, First Up and Second up records. And to be fair, I do look at the average SP and price fluctuations.

In my opinion, a good trainer and jockey combination can and does make a difference. I look for jockeys staying “on” or a poor jockey being replaced by a top jockey. Like most things in racing, they are no crystal balls available but considering information at hand and from a favourite source is a slight edge we can add to the quiver.

But do not fall for the Confirmation Bias twaddle.