I Total Winning Saddlecloth Numbers

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter mozzie789
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability
mozzie789
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
There is a race meeting with a number of races.

Each race has horses entered and each horse has a (saddlecloth) number, 1….x, with x being the number of horses entered in each race.

Each horse has a known probability of winning a race (reflected in its price).
I’d like to set a market where the winner is determined by adding the saddlecloth numbers of the winners of each race for the whole race meeting.

So, if there were 7 races in a meeting and saddlecloth no.3 won each race, then 21 would be the Total Winning Saddlecloth Number.

To simplify the overall market offered, there would be 3 brackets of numbers to choose the total from - for example, in a meeting with 7 races the brackets might be (7-26), (26-45) & (45+). Dead heat winners would have saddlecloth numbers averaged.

How would I determine the probability of each bracket occurring? Also, how would I determine the totals to include in the brackets (for a relatively equal chance of each bracket winning)?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Are there few enough horses that you could have a computer loop over all combinations of winners? If so you can explicitly compute the probability of every combination winning, and then add those up for each saddlecloth sum to see the chance of every sum ending up a winner.

If not, then this is probably going to be really hard or impossible
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top