Skip to content
StableBet
Professor Furlong and Pascal at the AI Lab
THE AI LAB
PASCAL'S PANEL · WEEK 13

Pascal's Panel - Week 13: Four-fold on favourites vs Follow the AI

This week on the Panel

Welcome to the Panel, where every betting idea gets a proper test. Two strategies in front of the Professor this week, both run over real races with the method laid bare, so you can see for yourself how each one holds up.

First, Pascal, the eternal optimist. He after a run of close calls, Pascal is chasing a big return this week, so this week he is stacking favourites into an accumulator: Four-fold on favourites, Four favourites in an accumulator. He is certain he has cracked it. He usually is, and that is exactly why his ideas are worth testing.

Second, a new idea. It comes from Rishi, one of our AI punter personas: the AI-truster, the sort who would back the computer's number one, backed blind. The persona is modelled, not a real reader (more on that just below), but the strategy it suggests is a genuine, testable one: Follow the AI, back the computer's top pick in every race.

The Professor tested both the only way that counts: against 26,839 real British races, flat stakes to Starting Price, with the fallers and pulled-up horses counted honestly as losses. Here is how each one actually performs.

Pascal
Pascal
the eternal optimist
−31.5p / £1
This week's pick Four-fold on favourites

“Each favourite wins more often than it loses, so stack four of them together and the returns balloon while the risk barely shifts. One tidy Saturday slip and a tenner becomes a proper payday.”

Meet Pascal

Pascal is the Lab's resident optimist and Professor Furlong's foil, certain every single week that he has finally cracked it. He turns up with a fresh angle, usually an accumulator or a way to chase last week's loss back, pitches it with total confidence, and watches the Professor test it properly on real races. He never wins and never learns, and he is the warmest reason to keep coming back.

See the full experiment →
Rishi
the AI-truster
−11.4p / £1
This week's pick Follow the AI

“It is an AI, so the computer must know more than I do. If I just back its number one in every race and let the maths do the work, surely a clever model beats a mug punter squinting at the form.”

Meet Rishi

Rishi trusts the machine over any human hunch, so he follows the model's most confident picks, sure that a clever computer must know. The honest twist is that our own model, backed blind, loses about as much as the favourite, because naming the likely winner is not the same as beating the price.

Their tell: the computer's number one, backed blind

See the full experiment →

Professor Furlong's verdict

Professor Furlong
On Pascal's pick It loses, and heavily: four favourites in an accumulator comes out at -31.52% to Starting Price, so for every £100 staked you get back only about £68.48. Here is why. A favourite is no near-certainty, it wins barely a third of the time, and even backed on its own to SP it already loses 9.0p in the pound because the bookmaker's margin is baked into the price. When you multiply four of those prices together you multiply that margin four times over too, so the four-fold carries a far bigger built-in edge against you than any single leg. All four favourites must win or the whole slip is dead, and the run of days where just one gets turned over swamps the rare day they all land, which is exactly why the loss is this deep.
Professor Furlong
On Rishi's pick Honest answer is no. Back my top pick blind in every race and you lose money: over 6,601 real bets to starting price the return is -11.36%, so for every £100 staked you get back about £88.64, a little worse than simply backing the favourite, which now loses about 9.03%. Here is why, and it has nothing to do with the model being clever. My top pick is usually the favourite or close to it, and the bookmaker has already shaved value off those short prices to bake in their margin, the over-round. Naming the most likely winner is not the same as being paid enough when it wins. I can rank horses better than a coin toss, but I am not handing you odds bigger than the true risk, so the house edge grinds the bankroll down race after race. Worth knowing too: this is mostly a jumps card, where fallers and pulled-up horses cost you full stakes on top of the margin.

The standings

Both of this week's strategies sit on the leaderboard already. Here is where everything we have tested stands right now, ranked by real-world return, the least-negative at the top. Every system is a net loss, so the top row is the best real performer, not a winner.

29 systems tested · 30,221real races · none beat the bookmaker's margin. The best real return is −0.8pin the pound, so even the strongest system is a net loss. The bookmaker's margin is the reason.

#StrategyWho proposed itReal return (per £1)£/weekSampleStrike£200/week → today
1The AI's most-confident picksThe ProfessorGuest: RishiAI persona, modelled−0.8p−£2361——
2Odds-on favourites onlyThe systemsGuest: BarryAI persona, modelled−5.2p−£105,076wins 60%−£860
3Favourite in a big fieldThe systemsTested system−7.5p−£15673wins 24%—
4Favourite in a small fieldThe systemsGuest: CarolAI persona, modelled−7.6p−£154,284wins 46%—
5Favourite over jumpsThe systemsTested system−8.1p−£1610,595wins 37%−£2,268
6Festival favouritesThe systemsGuest: CarolAI persona, modelled−8.2p−£162,352wins 32%—
7Each-way the favouriteThe basicsGuest: EddieAI persona, modelled−8.7p−£1730,221places 62%—
8Back the favouriteThe basicsTested system−9.0p−£1830,221wins 35%−£1,900
9Favourite on soft groundThe systemsGuest: CarolAI persona, modelled−9.1p−£1811,174wins 35%—
10Favourite in handicapsThe systemsTested system−9.2p−£1820,222wins 30%—
11Favourite on the FlatThe systemsTested system−9.5p−£1919,626wins 34%—
12Follow the AIThe ProfessorGuest: RishiAI persona, modelled−11.4p−£236,601——
13Back the second favouriteThe basicsGuest: SandraAI persona, modelled−12.2p−£2430,219wins 21%−£3,278
14Top-rated horseThe basicsGuest: FrankAI persona, modelled−15.4p−£3126,805wins 19%−£4,001
15Top-rated in handicapsThe systemsGuest: FrankAI persona, modelled−16.0p−£3220,202wins 16%—
16Double on two favouritesThe multiplesPascal, the punter−17.2p−£34———
17Lucky 15 on favouritesThe multiplesPascal, the punter−18.0p−£36———
18A random horseThe basicsGuest: DawnAI persona, modelled−21.5p−£4330,221wins 13%−£6,698
19Back the lowest drawThe systemsGuest: StanAI persona, modelled−25.5p−£5119,602wins 12%—
20Back the old stagersThe systemsGuest: CarolAI persona, modelled−27.1p−£548,917wins 9%—
21Each-way an outsiderThe basicsGuest: EddieAI persona, modelled−30.4p−£6128,399wins 7%—
22Four-fold on favouritesThe multiplesPascal, the punter−31.5p−£63———
23Back the outsiderThe basicsGuest: LornaAI persona, modelled−35.6p−£7130,221wins 3%−£5,614
24Four-fold on random horsesThe multiplesPascal, the punter−62.0p−£124———

24 systems tested · 26,839 real races · none beat the bookmaker's margin. The best real return is -4p in the pound. The bookmaker's margin, the over-round, the slice baked into every price so the odds add up to more than 100%, sits in all of them, and no selection rule we have tested clears it. That is the genuinely useful part: the leaderboard shows exactly where the edge goes.

See the full Betting Systems Leaderboard →

What we're testing next week

Pascal will be Pascal will be looking for a long shot next time. And another of the personas has floated our next guest considers trainer form, and we will run it the same way, against real races, with the method shown and the real result reported.

If you take one thing from the Panel, take this: picking a likely winner is the easy part. Getting paid more than the true risk is the hard part, and the over-round is what stands in the way. That is the insight every row on the leaderboard is really measuring. Bet for fun, with money you can afford to lose, and read our track record for whether anyone, us included, holds a real edge at all.

More Pascal's Panel issues