Punters' Paradise: Do you think there is a new middle ground - the shrewd recreational punter - and if so, what separates him from the 'pros'?
RHIG: Sure, but I think the market has always been reasonably efficient. There's certainly more people making worthwhile sums these days. When I first started out there was talk of maybe a dozen pros in the UK (horseracing). That was probably underestimating things but numbers have exploded since then
"Anyone who finds themselves in the middle ground has always been a loser - it's still the top 2-3% that make a profit."
Anyone who finds themselves in the middle ground has always been a loser - it's still the top 2-3% that make a profit.
Punters' Paradise: Is there a sub-category within that 2-4% who make small amounts in relation to the rest though - and if so, why? For example, many people on gambling forums claim to make a modest profit, but aren't pros. We know that some are lying, but all of them?
RHIG: I'd imagine winners/losers are fairly normally distributed iwth long tails. A lot of small winners are just people who have got lucky. If they really did have an edge you'd imagine they'd up their stakes
Personally, I'm very cautious about what I read on forums. The question is are they consistent small winners or do the small winners change every year?
"You need a culture of sharing - there need to be people with something useful to contribute"
Punters' Paradise: Very wise I'm sure - some awful degenerates out there.
I'd guess there is a bit of both - some people feeling their way and learning, and some just getting lucky.
Speaking of forums - what do you feel are the important characterstics of a good betting forum?
RHIG: That's a good question. You need a culture of sharing - there need to be people with something useful to contribute. If it's all one-way traffic those with something interesting to say won't share it
Too many of these forums just have lurkers or people with vested interests
Punters' Paradise: I'd tend to agree with that - sharing is key. Do you share info or tell your mates to "get on"
RHIG: Not usually. Most of my bets are during the live show and crop up due to temporarily wrong prices. I'm too busy getting on to ring around my mates (or should that be, my mates are too busy getting on!)
However, as I discussed in the last interview with zonker, I don't feel that pro/serious/organised gamblers share as much as they might
RHIG: I share the occasional footie tip but most people aren't interested.
"Tell someone you've got a third hand whisper on some horse and they'll bet their max - tell them you've got some computer footie model that says a 2/1 shot should be 5/4 and they're not interested."
Tell someone you've got a third hand whisper on some horse and they'll bet their max - tell them you've got some computer footie model that says a 2/1 shot should be 5/4 and they're not interested
Punters' Paradise: I'm not talking here about opening their methods for all to see, but more dsicussions with like-minded people
RHIG: It's hard Doc. We're all competing with each other. generally the only time I share is when I've had my fill and I want the market to 'correct' so I can hedge
Punters' Paradise: I understand that - I'm talking more about theoretical discussions, rather than specific bets/tips etc
E.g. you talked earlier about research - how powerful would it be if 3 or 4 heads worked together rather than 1!
RHIG: It's sometimes hard to talk theoretically without giving other aspects away
Punters' Paradise: Fair point
RHIG: In that example doc, I was thinking of 3/4 people sharing the workload under my guidance rather than brainstorming
Punters' Paradise: I guess we are back to some sort of equilibirum concept - some sharing can lead to mutual benefit, but the risk is that you give your secrets and get nothing back
RHIG: Sure doc - that's why it's important to be around people that have something to give in return
Punters' Paradise: Any figures you rate - authors, researchers, fellow gamblers, betting indsutry people etc? In particular, authors and researchers.
RHIG: There are obviously some other gamblers I rate that I can't really name here.
RHIG: The best published authors I've seen have been Bill Benter, John Whitley. Generally though the standard of journalism/authorship in gambling (especially racing) is dire. Have you ever looked at the shelves of WH Smiths? Shocking stuff.
"A good psychology primer would be Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, a good markets primer would be Market Wizards, the follow-up New Market Wizards and Advances in Behavioral Finance "
Punters' Paradise: Any books you'd recommend for a library?
RHIG: If I were to recommend books I wouldn't really suggest any specialist gambling books. I'd advise people to read around the subject: stats, psychology, markets.
A good psychology primer would be Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, a good markets primer would be Market Wizards, the follow-up New Market Wizards and Advances in Behavioral Finance
Punters' Paradise: Last question no.1 (the easy one) - you can wave a magic wand at the betting industry and have 1 (or 2 or 3 as you choose) wishes - what would you like to see happen?
RHIG: I'd like to see the race programme framed around what's interesting to gamblers not what races produce the biggest profits for the bookies. I also think much stronger policing of the markets is required - the amount of fraud that goes on, and its brazeness is quite shocking. The crooks are killing the game
Punters' Paradise: There is an interesting dichotomy with pro gamblers - on the one hand they are competing against each other, on the other, they are all depending on the same (broadly speaking) sources of information, the same bookies, the same legislation, the same supply of mug punters etc. Is it time there was a union or assocation of professional gamblers?
RHIG: The ultimate threat of any union is the withdrawal of its labour. If a union of pro punters threatened that all anyone would say is "please tell us that's a promise". There are one or two things pros have a mutual interest in - policed markets, growing markets etc
"The ultimate threat of any union is the withdrawal of its labour. If a union of pro punters threatened that all anyone would say is 'please tell us that's a promise'"
Punters' Paradise: Surely the exchanges wouldn't want the withdrawal of their labour?
RHIG: Well - there's certainly a groundswell of opionion inside the exchanges that wants the big winners off their backs
Punters' Paradise: But they provide the liquidity?
RHIG: Those who provide liquidity that wouldn't be there anyway are good, others are expendable.
Punters' Paradise: Thank you very much for the chat and interview.
Read other parts of this interview: Part 1 | Part 2
BBC
