Living on the punt... Part1

[TheEasyRun]

Hi guys.

This is not a post intending to upset anyone, as punting is a game full of memorable moments that I would never wish to take from anyone. It is however a small collection of what I have learnt in the game over the past twenty seven years, posted up to give food for thought to those who would like to take their punting activities to a higher plane......... those who would clearly like to punt horses for a living, or very close to it.

First up, a few basic misconceptions.

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!

2. It is a falacy that a massive turnover is needed to show profit over time.
This is for men who have that poor of a selection and staking method, that a very large turnover of money is needed to capitalize on a very skinny profit margin. In reality these type of punters last only as long as other money (or imagination) is proping it up.

3. It's quite false that a very high starting bank of $10,000 to $30,000 or more is needed to start a betting bank off. And false also is the thinking that the bank must be turned over and over like it was inside a washing machine.
The fact is a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!

Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.

4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.

Those are just a few misconceptions and there are of course plenty more, but I would rather go on to selection and staking methods, punting psychology, how to relax into a life on the punt, and why you should never except odds on any bet unless it can return you over $7 to the dollar.

I will post the rest up tommorow in Part 2, and then in Part 3 on Tuesday.

Happy Hunting
TheEasyRun

[ubetido]

Hi TheEasyRun

Good stuff i will be interested in reading what you post.

Cheers
ubetido

[Filante]

Is this an advert - maybe the next ISP Empower?

[Horse Whisperer]

i agree with everything you have said bar the first point.
i personally know of someone who has made an absolute killing from the punt and has gone from nothing to having a bank i would never see in my lifetime. although it would be extremely rare it has certainly been done, and im guessing more than once.



.

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!

[TheEasyRun]

Hi ubetido.

I was going to pop it all up tonight but did not realize how tired I would get. Look forward to chatting.

Sorry about that Filante, I should have realized how it might sound. No I will not be selling, or trying to sell, anything.

[downbylaw]

Should be good to see what you have to say. Agree with most points bar the starting bank, i think most people want to go 'pro' so they can quit their $30,000 job not do it and punt.

The psychology post should be interesting. My guess is someone slighty reckless yet conservative at times who can express little emotion and move on quick would make a good punter. Ok lol thats just me! Am i good? Well not pro yet but i havent paid for a sat night out in months.

I also think you have to try to be complety different in your approach to gambling as 95% are loosers correct? If you do the same thing as those 95% you will end up just like them.

[Filante]

Hi ubetido.

I was going to pop it all up tonight but did not realize how tired I would get. Look forward to chatting.

Sorry about that Filante, I should have realized how it might sound. No I will not be selling, or trying to sell, anything.

No problem Easy. I just thought you were going to turn into another one of those shonks who tell people they can make $5,000 a month.

The markets in horse racing are reasonably accurate and weighted against the punter (i.e. over 100%). To make $5,000 a month requires very good analysis and higher turnover than your $30,000-a-year type bloke could afford.

Cheers

Filante

[proxy]

Interesting read TheEasyRun, looking forward parts 2/3

[Chrome Prince]

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!


Agreed. Usually they started with big money and know how to handle it.
So, although they are now pro, started with a big bank behind them.


2. It is a falacy that a massive turnover is needed to show profit over time.
This is for men who have that poor of a selection and staking method, that a very large turnover of money is needed to capitalize on a very skinny profit margin. In reality these type of punters last only as long as other money (or imagination) is proping it up.


Agreed. In fact there are many different strategies to pro punting. Some have very high turnover (volume of bets), but the most common is very few targetted bets. It's very hard to have a high volume of bets in a negative market and come out in front. Exotic punters are the only real exception, but then they must have a massive bank behind them to endure the losses.


3. It's quite false that a very high starting bank of $10,000 to $30,000 or more is needed to start a betting bank off. And false also is the thinking that the bank must be turned over and over like it was inside a washing machine.
The fact is a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!


This is where I disagree to a certain extent. One can start small and build it up, but if one wants to start making a steady income to cover the bills etc, there's no way a $4,000 bank will cut the mustard to provide a liveable income. Even if one was lucky enough to get 20% POT per month, and it's not going to happen every month, that's only $800 per month utilizing the full $4,000, one bad month and bang! One must be able to cater for long runs of outs and that run depends on strike rate. I agree with your point on turnover in relation to straight out betting, exotics are a little different.


Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.


What sort of POT are you basing that on, I strongly disagree.


4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.


Are you saying an uneducated person stands a better chance or experience and research has more weight?


why you should never except odds on any bet unless it can return you over $7 to the dollar.


Again, strongly disagree. The weight of bias against longer prices means you have to be far better than the market suggests. Backing the shorter end of the market has less bias against the punter and is far easier to overcome.

Not picking on you, and a lot of what you have written is excellent, I just disagree with some points.
Look forward to your response and further parts to your article.

[crash]

Great thread easy money,

I agree with you that the real pro. punters are advantage takers of spot plays [good gamblers], not % grinders and they coildn't give a fig about roi's or pot's. Most aren't millionaires either, but battlers.

Big money punters are mostly well off mug punters [Kerry Packer was the top of this tree] and sure there are a few exceptions around for both these points, but most of us are born with 5 fingers on each hand. Naturally there are exceptions.


Your confusing education with intelligence Chrome. A smart punter will take an educated punter's shirt every time.

Any idiot can get [or buy] an education, but our level of intelligence is something were are born with.
Good 'gamblers' are also born not made, just like good muso's, chefs, orators etc. are also born with a gift for it. There is good money to be made from those easily convinced, that gifts some are born with can be learnt or bought.

[darkydog2002]

Great post and thanks for posting it.

I hope you comment on how mind numbingly boring punting for a living actually is.

Cheers.
darky.

[TheEasyRun]

Hi Guys.

I will see if I can answer most in Parts 2 and 3.
Remembering that these posts are about the average man making a living on the punt.

" Are you saying an uneducated person stands a better chance, or experience and research has more weight? "

Yes to the first part Chrome Prince, and yes to experience. Generaly the lowly educated do not take part in needless research like highly educated people do.

The highly educated, and those who deem themselves as such, are hamstrung the very minute they start their kick in as punters. For some reason they have an undeniable smugness that the racing game requires an intimate knowledge of equations, mixed in with superior intelligence, of which they have plenty of.
Mathematitions, School Teachers, Engineers, Accountants.....they seem to suffer the most with it. And when a highly educated man crashes, boy does he crash. If he is to succeed he must strip off all his smartalecness.

Now onto Part 2. The Psychology involved in Living on, or rather off, the Punt.

[TheEasyRun]

" I hope you comment on how mind numbingly boring punting for a living actually is. "

Boring is the last word I would use on punting for a living. Do not lock yourself away. I hope you find something in my next post that gets you thinking on how to rid yourself of boredom Darky.

[downbylaw]

4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.


Are you saying an uneducated person stands a better chance or experience and research has more weight?

I dont think he is saying that ChromePrince, the way it come across to me is that systems dont work. Which is a firm belief of mine.

[partypooper]

A really good thread, I think it touches on that secret desire to make a living "without" working though. Personaly, it's something that I have aspired to for quite some time,( living off the punt that is) and although I have made a profit for nearly 4 years, going to that next step seems very hard to do.

Crash, I know the type of Character you're talking about, but on any one day they are either Rich or broke, in fact my Dad was a bit like that, we had periods of living like Kings, followed by periods of Poverty!

Anyway, roll on next episode!

[downbylaw]

Great post and thanks for posting it.

I hope you comment on how mind numbingly boring punting for a living actually is.

Cheers.
darky.This i find interesting. Ive always heard when its something you love its as if its not even work.. Surely living on the punt would free up time for other things you are interested in? Im not saying its easy at all where you get to lounge around all day, but you name your own hours for starters and work from home.

By the sounds of your post you live off the punt so good on ya, well done and maybe just try to find another hobby as the punt isnt it anymore.

[Filante]

1. Educated people with money are losers on the punt.

2. Uneducated people earning $30,000 per annum at their job, can earn $60,000 per annum, without any research or knowledge, by picking $7 shots.

[Chrome Prince]

and a $4,000 bank.

I don't buy it - sorry.

[Chrome Prince]

This i find interesting. Ive always heard when its something you love its as if its not even work.. Surely living on the punt would free up time for other things you are interested in? Im not saying its easy at all where you get to lounge around all day, but you name your own hours for starters and work from home.



downbylaw,

Punting is generally a very lonely business, which is why forums like this and others are a buzz of activity. I don't think darky is saying he doesn't enjoy it when he's betting and the races are on, I think he's saying that there are vast amounts of time where nothing happens, and of course, there is pressure.

I don't mind posting that I'm going through a very tough time at present with my main method, you have to be very tough psychologically and be able to withstand the enormous rollercoaster of performance. I enjoy the punt, but do not enjoy the fluctuations of ups and downs.

There is nothing more gratifying when you're right and it all falls into place, the challenge is withstanding when you are wrong. Not just the bank, but the psychological effect - especially if the downturn lasts a while.

I find myself breaking out the data to recheck, questioning my method from every angle, where did I go wrong, why is this happening, was this inevitable, will it continue, should I stop and reassess etc etc.

Of course, after spending countless hours, the conclusion is always the same, it's just a part of the overall result and I must persist, as if I now stop, I will cost myself money when things even out.

One can have a huge bank, a red hot method, but the challenge is more mental than anything else.

[TheEasyRun]

Partypooper. Quite right, the mention of the average man equaling his wage and still keeping his job was a quick example to lead to quitting. And how you do not need a large betting bank to hold sway on $50,000 a year.

Filante. I did not mention uneducated people, nor $60,000. I only mentioned "needless" research, not any or all, and the only knowledge I talked about was the intimate knowledge of equations, and how they have no place in horse punting. Now..... $7 shots? good god man, you wont make a living at those odds........it must be over $7 to the dollar!

You dont have to buy it Chrome Prince as it's given away. You will however have to accept it one day.

Highly educated system boys are we?

[breadman]

downbylaw,

Punting is generally a very lonely business, which is why forums like this and others are a buzz of activity. I don't think darky is saying he doesn't enjoy it when he's betting and the races are on, I think he's saying that there are vast amounts of time where nothing happens, and of course, there is pressure.

I don't mind posting that I'm going through a very tough time at present with my main method, you have to be very tough psychologically and be able to withstand the enormous rollercoaster of performance. I enjoy the punt, but do not enjoy the fluctuations of ups and downs.

There is nothing more gratifying when you're right and it all falls into place, the challenge is withstanding when you are wrong. Not just the bank, but the psychological effect - especially if the downturn lasts a while.

I find myself breaking out the data to recheck, questioning my method from every angle, where did I go wrong, why is this happening, was this inevitable, will it continue, should I stop and reassess etc etc.

Of course, after spending countless hours, the conclusion is always the same, it's just a part of the overall result and I must persist, as if I now stop, I will cost myself money when things even out.

One can have a huge bank, a red hot method, but the challenge is more mental than anything else.

I had the same problem this year in the baseball. I was flying at 58% and looking to 60-65% for the year on previous years results, but it fell into a big hole slowly and ended up not betting on it at 55%. That still gave me a pto of 6.5% so im not complaining at all its just the previous years were over 10%. When i saw the plays losing i noticed 80% of my teams were getting more hits than the opposition. So something was wrong i thought, but not to be it was a rough patch and i went back to just halving my bets and only betting on the best bets that the system provided. Well since then ive striked at 70% and the yearly best won for the 5th year in a row. So all in all im happy but there are months where you think what is going on and yes i was a victum of this hence going through previous stats that took me 12-14 hours a day of study and working on the system. In the long run though the selections just had a rough time and I learned a lesson from it. Probably one thing to remember is that we are all always learning!!! Cheers Breadman

[Chrome Prince]

And how you do not need a large betting bank to hold sway on $50,000 a year.

the only knowledge I talked about was the intimate knowledge of equations, and how they have no place in horse punting. Now..... $7 shots? good god man, you wont make a living at those odds........it must be over $7 to the dollar!

You will however have to accept it one day.



We all have different methods and approaches, granted. But when I see such puzzling and illogical statements, I have to disagree.

To make $50,000 per year on a $4,000 bank is impossible - fact.

Mathematics is the very foundation of punting. It's not about how many winners you pick, it's about the average odds compared to strike rate and the overlays that exist. No place? One day you will have to accept that it is one of the most critical factors in being successful at this game.

Over $7 to the dollar on a $4,000 bank to make 50,000 per year - geez you are optimistic. Perhaps a touch of reality might not go astray.

What do you suppose the longest run of outs might be over $7.00.

How much would you have to invest to make $50,000 per year.

The bank would never withstand it - mathematical fact.

[xanadu]

G'day CP,

Post19,Your very perceptive view on the punting psyche was spot on.....!
It is not easy spending many mind-numbing hours studying form and implementing profit-making opportunities.
But then again....who said this was an easy way to riches........?
If the individual truly believes their method is worthwhile and will win in the longrun then it makes all the effort worthwhile.
My mentor was the incomparable Don Scott whose methods via his publications, were instilled in my attitude to betting/punting at a very young age.
These have put me in good stead although I have adapted my methods as racing has changed over the last couple of decades.
Two last insights that I will share with all.......
1)class always will tell in the longterm....!
2) flexibility is the key to your approach to investing. Sometimes, "overs" on the win or place provide opportunities....then on other occasions exotic betting provides sound profit-making opportunities.
The punter(s) must remain alert at all times!

Cheers.

[Filante]

Partypooper. Quite right, the mention of the average man equaling his wage and still keeping his job was a quick example to lead to quitting. And how you do not need a large betting bank to hold sway on $50,000 a year.

Filante. I did not mention uneducated people, nor $60,000. I only mentioned "needless" research, not any or all, and the only knowledge I talked about was the intimate knowledge of equations, and how they have no place in horse punting. Now..... $7 shots? good god man, you wont make a living at those odds........it must be over $7 to the dollar!

You dont have to buy it Chrome Prince as it's given away. You will however have to accept it one day.

Highly educated system boys are we?

Easy

1. You agreed with Chrome Prince's use of the word "uneducated".
2. You gave a figure of $5,000 a month profit = $60,000 per annum.
3. No research is ever needless - if an avenue of investigation leads you to the conclusion that something doesn't work, that is sometimes as useful as finding a winning method.
4. All racing analysis has at its heart a system or a matrix of systems. Statistics, systems and history give people a basis upon which to analyse form. A knowledge of mathematics, statistics, physics, econometric modelling etc. can form the basis upon which sytems are worked out - this cannot, as you suggest, be a disadvantage.
5. In the end, the making of a bet is an engagement in a debate of probability in which you believe the happening of an event is more likely than the odds suggest. If you have no education, training or research to give you an indication of that probability or if you do not have access to information compiled by someone who does, you will lose.

Enough from me. Your drivel has attracted more attention than was warranted.

Post some $7+ winners and I'll withdraw the drivel comment.

Cheers

Filante

[crash]

Filante,

Your point 1.
I think easyrun meant intelligence was a vital ingredient to successful punting, not well educated [except in punting of course]. Some of the biggest dummies around are well educated.

Pittsburgh Phil only went through primary school, but he was obviously a very intelligent pro. punter.

Grollo the Italian [Grollo industries] was a pheasant who never got past grade 3 and if you look around, the world is full of very rich, intelligent but uneducated self made billionaires and our taxi's and restaurants have loads of well educated drivers, kitchen-hands and waiters who'll never be worth a bean:-))

[TheEasyRun]

Righto Chrome and Filante. Enough of your misquote's.
Read the following sentence below that I wrote in the original post again, then read the misquote's you both posted, and get a grip on the figures on which you are twisting around.

" Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty. "

The very reason you two can not smell the roses is that your both stuck in a void of numerical system punting that even with a massive turnover, simply does not produce enough profit for the average man to live on. They do not work. They cannot. Why will be explained in Part 3. And for cristsake do not misquote anything out of it.

What you call 'my drivel' is in reality race punting law.

[umrum]

Everyone has different theories and methods. There is not neccessarily one winning way. Could be thousands of different winning ways. Some of what you write is excellent but the smug self-righteous attitude is tiresome.

cheers
umrum

[downbylaw]

Im just glad to see some action here other than endless tips for a change.

[crash]

I think their saying easyrun is, you could up a few tips in the $7 range and their attention might be a bit more sincere !

[Chrome Prince]

Righto Chrome and Filante. Enough of your misquote's.
Read the following sentence below that I wrote in the original post again, then read the misquote's you both posted, and get a grip on the figures on which you are twisting around.

" Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty. "

The very reason you two can not smell the roses is that your both stuck in a void of numerical system punting that even with a massive turnover, simply does not produce enough profit for the average man to live on. They do not work. They cannot. Why will be explained in Part 3. And for cristsake do not misquote anything out of it.

What you call 'my drivel' is in reality race punting law.

The EasyRun,

I did not call what you wrote drivel, I just challenged the mathematics of it - it simply didn't add up. I can challenge what you've written without twisting what you said.

The very reason I cannot smell the roses is that I broke my nose in a car accident and lost 90% of the sense of smell - no other reason.

Rather than myself or Filante misquoting, it seems you are now backpeddling rather than explaining how it can be done and posting hard numbers.
The reason why is that the numbers just don't add up.

Don't get me wrong, much of what you have posted is excellent, the rest leaves a very large question mark.

I am often amused that others can make decisions on what sort of punter another person is, just by going on what they've posted on a forum.

Let me tell you that I am not just a system punter. There are many facets which make up my punting.

I use systems.
I handicap.
I follow horses that are on a watchlist.
I use other methods and lay horses as well.

I enjoy systems immensely, but that is nowhere near an accurate description of the overall picture. I believe there is a place for everything in this game, providing you can identify an edge.

Amazingly, most of my systems are actually based on sound handicapping principles - imagine that!

The common misconception seems to be that a system punter is one that relies on longshots or bets numbers or follows jockeys or trainers or similar, again, that is way off base.

There is no misquote at all - you stated that to match $30,000 per annum, all you need is a $4,000 bank.

It still doesn't add up how you word it.

[chika]

Im just glad to see some action here other than endless tips for a change.
I'm new here but have watched this forum for a long time and have to agree with downbylaw ,it is now basically tips and comps.
I think The EasyRun has a lot of courage for posting what he/she has and I look forward to the next chapters.
It always amazes me that all the knockers always come out of the woodwork if someone does not punt in the traditional manner ( you know the usual way which most punters do and lose ).
I don't have a clue what the next chapters are going to be but they should be interesting and should bring more out the woodwork including all the Einsteins and their maths.
I note a comment that $50K a year is impossible on a $4000 bank, my answer to that is wanna bet?
A long time ago I took note of what was said by a past member of this forum and actually correspondend with him.
Take it as you will, because it doesn't matter to me at all, but I no longer work.

All the best to all of you and I suggest you let TheEasyRun finish his/hers final chapters, you never know you just might learn something as I did, from my mentor.

[Chrome Prince]

I'm not discouraging him from posting Chika, nor am I knocking him, but you don't have to be Einstein to identify basic errors, when you've been around the block a few times.

You may have been lucky and turned your $4,000 bank into $50,000, but I'll guarantee it was not win betting, or if it was, it was pure luck, continue in that vain and you bank will defrost very quickly.

The bottom line is that nobody should be recommending trying to win $50,000 off a $4,000 bank on 7/1 or greater shots, no matter who you are or what your method is.

I'll wait and see what roses are revealed though......

[chika]

Gotta agree the 7/1 has me bamboozaled but lets see what happens in part 2 and 3.

As I said should be interesting.

[Tubby]

It always amazes me that all the knockers always come out of the woodwork if someone does not punt in the traditional manner ( you know the usual way which most punters do and lose ).I also applaud TheEasyRun for posting his(or her) thoughts. Is has been a good read. I also appreciate that sometimes the stuff that gets written on this forum can get a bit snakey. However, all that said, I don't think that replying to someone's comments in a disbelieving or disagreeing way necessarily makes you a "knocker". I was brought up thinking that everyone was entitled to their own opinions but likewise should have some way of supporting their point of view. If we all thought the same way the place would be pretty boring. Just my opinion.

[Chuck]

yep i agree totally chrome it just can't be done (especially consistently). plus the $7 is ludicrous a well

[TheEasyRun]

Backpeddling Crome.....from what? and stop saying fifty to four......its fifty to six. And yes I know you cannot achieve it.

I was going to go onto the Phycology side of punting for Part 2, but I will leave that to last. Instead I will get straight into Part 3 - Selection and Staking. I may not have it done by 10.00 pm, when I was originally going to post up tonight, but it will be up by Tuesday.

[Chrome Prince]

Backpeddling Crome.....from what?

its fifty to six.

And yes I know you cannot achieve it.



Ahem.

[maverick1993]

Great thread i hope it continues.
But posting anything like theses types of statements are always going to attract questions and opposing theories...
Debates are healthy and educational ..
hopefully we keep to the facts and not get personel....

cant wait to find out what this 7/1 staking and selection method is all about.

[topsy99]

quite a challenging post and well worth watching.

when you say "i know you cant achieve it"
does it mean you chrome or all of us.

i know someone who cant achieve it and i dont mean you.

[Mark]

This is by far the best post in ages & has managed to drag me out of my self imposed exile.

It lasted longer than I thought it would before the nay sayers came out and I am very surprised that CP, someone who I have almost totally agreed with over the years, seems to be the main knocker.

Chrome, I've told this before and I will repeat it for the record. I quit my full-time job over 5 years ago and have survived totally from the races ever since. I opened a Betfair a/c with $3000, and lost almost all of it in the first month. My balance got down to $500 & I have lived off this amount, building it up, withdrawing regularly & never having to deposit again.

FACT
It can be done.

Cheers
Mark

[Chrome Prince]

Mark,

Yours is a uniquely individual circumstance.

Had the post been about laying horses or setting markets, I would never have said it couldn't be done.

But that was not what was offered up.

What was offered was win betting on horses @ 7/1 or greater using a $4,000 or $6,000 bank providing $30,000 or $50,000 income, (depending which version you read), which I still state can't be done.

What TheEasyRun was proposing was quite the opposite to your method, unless he hasn't explained himself fully.

Great to see you back Mark and great to hear you're still kicking goals.

[mad]

I don't mean to play devil's advocate here, but it sounds to me like a challenge could be a-brewin'. Start a thread with a theorectical 6K starting bank and let's see how you go over the spring.

[crash]

yep i agree totally chrome it just can't be done (especially consistently). plus the $7 is ludicrous a well

It seems that the main knockers agree. I have used your quote Chuck because it's the shortest. No other reason mate :-)

My comments so far have only been to have a go at those who see intelligence linked to higher education [generally, only a post-war Western phenomenon]. As for the small bank to kick off with, I'm with Mark and Easyrun. If you can win you can win and the odds are in your favour that you won't kick off with a run of outs. A big bank just puts off the inevitable downfall of the mug punter who 'thinks' they can live off the punt.

Interestingly, Phil Purser is a plus $7 man too. He thinks short odds and lots of bets are for losers who can't consistently spot a few decent bets a month to jump on because their handicapping skills are hopeless.. I've been leaning that way too for awhile now too and the smaller the odds the smaller my bets. The results have been very good indeed.

I think we should let easyrun have his say, as I think there are a few here who only see what they want to see and are knocking the bloke prematurely because his ideas obviously differ to their gospel of punting. Closed minds learn nothing.

[ubetido]

Well said Crash the post hasn't been up long and i feel Easyrun is already feeling like he/she is being choked down from getting on with it. Probably thinking whats going to happen once i post the 2nd and 3rd part. Lets loosen the reigns a bit.

Cheers
ubetido

[TheEasyRun]

Hi guys.

Topsy.
No I meant that Chrome cannot, meaning not with his line of thinking, only I made it personal and should not have, and apologise for getting like that on the thread.

I'm having trouble juggling my slow typing in with my time restrictions, but should have the next part up by afternoon.

[syllabus23]

Quote from original post.

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!

This is simply an opinion dressed up as a fact.Statements like "They all" are always suspect and quite commonplace in this type of forum, where the notion of scientific proof seldom raises it's head.

Anyway, it appeals to the masses and I guess that sells the product.Little wonder old Adolf and his mates had such a ball.

I particularly like the theory,"The smart are dumb and the dumb are smart".

Wishful thinking boys.

[Moderator 3]

TheEasyRun has indicated here that the posts are not a commercial and knows that the Forum Terms of Use do not permit "unpaid advertisements".

That being the case, any comments disagreeing with TheEasyRun need to be polite, not insulting as per the Forum Terms of Use.

Let's hear TheEasyRun out.

Moderator.

[Chrome Prince]

It seems that the main knockers agree. I have used your quote Chuck because it's the shortest. No other reason mate :-)

My comments so far have only been to have a go at those who see intelligence linked to higher education [generally, only a post-war Western phenomenon]. As for the small bank to kick off with, I'm with Mark and Easyrun. If you can win you can win and the odds are in your favour that you won't kick off with a run of outs. A big bank just puts off the inevitable downfall of the mug punter who 'thinks' they can live off the punt.

Interestingly, Phil Purser is a plus $7 man too. He thinks short odds and lots of bets are for losers who can't consistently spot a few decent bets a month to jump on because their handicapping skills are hopeless.. I've been leaning that way too for awhile now too and the smaller the odds the smaller my bets. The results have been very good indeed.

I think we should let easyrun have his say, as I think there are a few here who only see what they want to see and are knocking the bloke prematurely because his ideas obviously differ to their gospel of punting. Closed minds learn nothing.

I'll say it again, I'm not knocking the bloke at all.

Much of what he has written is excellent.

crash, as we all have differing strategies, there's nothing wrong with $7 plus bets at all, and I never criticised those bets.

Neither did I criticize starting off small, better to start off small than get burned early with a big bank.

Mark's experience demonstrated this very well, he now lives off that initial $500 after losing $2,500.

What I did question was the flawed maths in a $6,000 bank to earn $50,000 when you are betting $7 plus shots.

Unless he is using some other method than win betting it simply cannot be done. Not only can't I do it, NOBODY else can - the numbers do not add up.

I'll leave this thread now for any further comment, as , in my opinion, it's quite irresponsible to post something like this that might lead to someone following such action in future.

TheEasyRun is quite entitled to his say, but -1 + -1 will never equal +1, win betting.

I also feel an inevitable staking plan coming on which would only lead to further comment from myself which might be misinterpreted as a personal attack, so I'll refrain from commenting on that as well.

[Mr. Logic]

Hi guys.

First up, a few basic misconceptions.

3. It's quite false that a very high starting bank of $10,000 to $30,000 or more is needed to start a betting bank off. And false also is the thinking that the bank must be turned over and over like it was inside a washing machine.
The fact is a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!

Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.

Happy Hunting
TheEasyRun

I will be interested to see the logic behind this. How low turnover, because as you say, "a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!" from a $6,000 starting bank backing horses at $7.00+ can make $50,000 a year.

I have wracked my brains out.

The only thing I can think of at this stage that might remotely fit the bill is a selection method which is able to consistently identify horses at $7.00 plus that are in fact around TRUE even money chances, which to anyone would be like discovering a legitimate money printing press! and then combining these horses in all up bets. That way turnover could also be said to be minimised as the initial outlay could be claimed as the turnover for an all up wager such as a double or treble.

As I said, I will be interested to see the logic behind this betting method.

[partypooper]

ooooh! isn't this exciting?.........

[crash]

I believe a good handicapper can find horses at 6/1+ that are really even money chances [if they win they sure are] if that is all they are looking for. We all know that these horses win every day. Needing lots of action is the problem for most punters. Zeroing in confidently on the longer odds [only] would require a lot of discipline, hard work and days with no bets and days with one or two bet only.

It's just impossible handicap for the 6/1+ winners successfully AND have a lot of bets.

You wouldn't need too many winners to get home regularly at those odds to make pretty good money. Problem is, how many punters here would be happy with and have the discipline to only back a few bets a week, or put in the necessary handicapping leg-work?

[crash]

Well said Crash the post hasn't been up long and i feel Easyrun is already feeling like he/she is being choked down from getting on with it. Probably thinking whats going to happen once i post the 2nd and 3rd part. Lets loosen the reigns a bit.

Cheers
ubetido

Yep, scared him off. I don't blame him as I'm sure he has better things to do with his time than share something here after such a hostile reception. His mouth was full of boots before he [or maybe she] got it half open !

[crash]

I think what perhaps confuses the short price brigade punter ['the only way to possibly win'] is the odds on offer and true odds. Odds on offer can never be more than a very rough guess, regardless if they are worked out mechanically on a computer, handicapped or the final SP by the public as closest to true odds.

True odds can only be worked out after a race by placings and beaten margins. Regardless of what happens during the race or at the start gate, the final result is the truth of the matter regarding true odds and what really was 'overs' and what was in fact, way 'unders'.

Approximately 70% of favourites lose, so that's a 2/1 chance of winning. A genuine negative expectation game chasing the shorties and regardless of how good the handicapping, the odds of getting it wrong and our money being on the wrong horse too often are quite large. Due mainly I think to what can happen in a race from the gates to the finish post.
True odds can go from odds-on to 100/1 in the blink of an eye and in less than a horse length, anywhere during a race for a multitude of reasons.

Maybe it is with this in mind, some successful punters see that 'overs' on the shorties are rarer than we like to believe and are looking very closely at the 3rd. or 4th.. to maybe the 7th favourites for more chance of genuine 'overs' among the prices those runners enjoy in a race.
Not betting them Willy nilly, but finding a few a week that have good things going for them that will be [hopefully] missed by the public and entering the starting gate with far better odds available that it deserves. If it's not missed by the public it becomes a no bet.

It might be along these lines of thought that some punters discover that the $7+ runners aren't so 'impossible' to win on after all. Very good handicapping skill and plenty of time and effort would be required of course, but I think the potential for good profits are certainly there. It's maybe all about true odds and perceived odds and boy, the public gets them wrong a lot and so do the bookies.

[crash]

Before my above mistake is gleefully pointed out: "Approximately 70% of favourites lose, so that's a 2/1 chance of winning' should be 2/1 chance of losing.

[umrum]

"Not betting them Willy nilly, but finding a few a week that have good things going for them that will be [hopefully] missed by the public and entering the starting gate with far better odds available that it deserves. If it's not missed by the public it becomes a no bet."

Great point Crash. I am a 'value' punter myself. I'm not scared to take shorts on the right horse i.e paratroopers but generally look for the value and bet accordingly. Have to be very patient and sometimes a lot of faith in your method is required because if your backing horses @ $16 when you rate the $10, they are still only going to win approx one in ten races but because you are getting value it can be seen out and when you hit the rewards are there...

cheers
umrum

[darkydog2002]

Will there be a part 2 to this very interesting Thread?

Cheers.
Darky.

[crash]

I think our thread starter had given us the flick darky.

Umrum,
Lately I've been concentrating on races with only one leader who has an inside [ish] alley and has a good jockey who can rate and control the pace and backmarkers in outside[ish] alleys with jockeys on board who can do what their told [get back and go to sleep until the turn] in races with more than 1 leader to set up some pace. I've been pulling some good winners in the 5/1 to 8/1 range with the odd one above that. The backmarkers drawn wide is were the best money is though.

[syllabus23]

4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.

Good heavens you guys,,does this statement really make any sense at all ????

It goes against common sense that an educated person can come up with a workable system..????? Do you all really believe that ????

"It simply cannot be done" ??????? Trash.

Yet he encourages individuals on an income of $30,000 to invest $6000 (where?)

For heavens sake.........

[crash]

4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.

Good heavens you guys,,does this statement really make any sense at all ????

It goes against common sense that an educated person can come up with a workable system..????? Do you all really believe that ????

"It simply cannot be done" ??????? Trash.

Yet he encourages individuals on an income of $30,000 to invest $6000 (where?)

For heavens sake.........

I've never been any of those professions you quoted [I can spell mathematician and individual though] so I wouldn't know and the guy never got half a chance to explain his reasoning did he?

[brave chief]

lol @ this.

My suspicion is this was someone like Neil playing silly-************s, or perhaps it was an advert & the moderator & reception has scared him off.

you dont need a big bank (about $6k will do), you dont do high turnover, but still make $50k a year. yep, thats for real....

[Chrome Prince]

I'm very open to new ideas, new angles, new approaches.

But when someone comes along and tells me that 1 + 1 = 4, you've got to question it, and that's all I did.

No answers were forthcoming.

[crash]

Throttling him straight after his first post and every post after never really gave him a chance and telling him what he was trying to say was 1 + 1 = 4 long before it could be definitely concluded by anyone he was saying any such thing, didn't really help chrome and now he has gone your putting the boot in?. What happened to the land of the fair go?

No wonder no one says much here anymore, they just tip [and not even that's safe, even when you tip before a race you can be accused of not backing your selection that comes up at big odds].

[syllabus23]

hmmmmm The form around here seems to be standing up.

[Chrome Prince]

I'm not putting my boot anywhere, I stated the facts, I challenged him and he produced more of the same....no answers at all.

In my opinion, fair is fair, if someone posts percentages and profits the like of which is traditionally impossible, you need to quantify it or at least cast some light on it.

Especially when it is handed out like advice.

I challenged his figures, nothing else - and I'm pretty sure that's fair enough.

I think when I posted "I feel a staking plan coming on", that's when he left.

"All you need is $6,000 to make $30,000" is irresponsible advice in my opinion.

He never came back to state why it isn't.

And for the record he was talking BACKING 7/1 SHOTS, not laying or arbing or anything else.

So the bottom line is I heard him out enough to know that backing 7/1 shots on a $6,000 bank earns $30,000 plus per annum.

I don't think I need to see any other figures to know what's wrong with this.

Still, I look forward to his replies and his other postings.

[xanadu]

Mark,

Post40, interesting reading.....
There is a bloke on weekend radio who cannot lead punters into a profit -making strategy! He hasn't picked a winner since Julius Caesar was a boy!
Good luck to you.........!

[Neil]

I was very interested to read what TheEasyRun intended to post.

After all, it's not every day that someone joins the forum and from their first post offers to share a proven money making method with us all for free. So I was very curious to see what was on offer.

I hardly believe the Moderator post below could have scared off TheEasyRun, as has been posted here.

The Moderator post simply pointed out that "TheEasyRun .... knows that the Forum Terms of Use do not permit "unpaid advertisements". It also requested a fair go and concluded "Let's hear TheEasyRun out."
TheEasyRun has indicated here that the posts are not a commercial and knows that the Forum Terms of Use do not permit "unpaid advertisements".

That being the case, any comments disagreeing with TheEasyRun need to be polite, not insulting as per the Forum Terms of Use.

Let's hear TheEasyRun out.

Moderator.

[Chrome Prince]

Okay then.

He was going to post selections and staking next and then psychology.

I keep my opinions to myself.

I just hope a visitor to this site doesn't follow his advice without reading the full story.

[crash]

I was very interested to read what TheEasyRun intended to post.
The Moderator post simply pointed out that "TheEasyRun .... knows that the Forum Terms of Use do not permit "unpaid advertisements". It also requested a fair go and concluded "Let's hear TheEasyRun out."

I also [and others I'm sure] was very interested to hear TheEasyRun out. As a new member he deserved at least that. Buckley's hope he will be back now after the jackboot treatment.

[partypooper]

Umrum, I think you say it all there, not many individuals can think in terms of backing one winner in 10 say at an average of 12-1, which in fact is VERY good business, but not many could handle it. Not to mention the losing runs that would have to be endured with a 10% S/R ??

Chrome, if it wasn't a staking plan surely it was all ups, as I'm sure the wording was $7 to your $, which is quite different to 6-1 winners. eg. all up 4 x place getters @ say $1.65 (ave) whether on the same day or not, pays $7+ to your dollar. (sounds like a bit of "Sharp" practice there doesn't it?)

[brissy]

Geeeeesuss fellas, now we'll never effing know!

I, for one, was all ears (eyes?).
I figure he should have at least had a bit of time to explain himself, instead of having people jumping down his neck.

[Chuck]

for gods sake the bloke takes a few knocks and never comes back. he posted things that many of us thought were not within the realms of possibility, we said so and so he left. his next chapter was on psychology? well geez i don't think we'll learn much there if the bloke leaves for good just because he copped a bit of criticism

[TheEasyRun]

It is almost criminal how a couple of days planned rest can quickly turn into the two busiest days of the month.


Selection and Staking.

Selection

Horse Racing is a sport of flesh and blood, it is not a numbers game and should not be played as such. Most that get involved in punting have a distinct respect for horse racing and horses right from the start. The training of them, the placing of horses into races, sorting out of Class, getting a grip on what is involved in obtaining odds and the amount to be bet.
It is the Basic Level at which we all started.

Following on comes much higher levels of enlightened Staking Methods, Ratings that we think we must addhere to, Systems to be nutted out and played, Sectional Times, Weight Differentals, it goes on and on until years later we are really no more wiser than when we started at that Basic Level.
And that is the level that has to be returned to.

Judgement

Class in a horse is only held in it's Fitness, and by the way that fitness is trained on or trained out. The Class differences of a horse when matched with the Class of others in it's race, in relation to where each runners Class lies on that day, in that race, and with the improvement expected in fitness on some runners mixed in with the expected decline of fitness of others, is the only Class that has to be studied.
The only way to get a true opinion of a horses Class and Fitness level is that the horse must have been Sighted and Studied in a previous race, to gauge it's Fitness and Class. You must have have a good understanding of at least one runner in a race, that you judge as being at a fitness good enough to hold his class, in the race that is being studied so you can gauge how to run off the other horses against it.
And that 'before seen' horse must be one of the runners that with expected fitness, match both the Class of the Race, and the Class of Horse that you determine one needs to be to take part at the finish of the race in direct relation to Distance.

It is from this analysis that selections are made.

One or two horses should walk out of the that Field Listing, with a couple dawdling behind them. They move to right, leaving the rest of the field behind them.
If the horse that brought you into this race is one of the first two that walked, then all well and good, but if it did not then it might come to your attention in a later race, so watch that horse with eyes not money.
If none walked out of the Field Listing, or if they came out in a bunch, then it is not a race to be punted. The one or two that did walk out are the punted horses.
Never overstudy to find bets.

The sighting of horses racing and the matching of that to Form, is the only way that true opinion can be used to make a living on punting.

Weight, Barrier Draw, Jockey or Trainer, Sectional Times, Barrier Trials, Gear, Steward Reports, Ratings, Systems, Track Conditions, ctdw and all their variations.
None of these should have a bearing on the Selection Proccess.

[TheEasyRun]

Has Tavette at Sandown on thursday, after an easy run followed by a lung strengthening front running run, got enough class held in her fitness, to match it with the back to back winner or the sleeping topweight.
Does she require much more time and Distance? Does any horse walk out of the Field Listing?
I do not know because I have not studied the race yet. But when I do I will deal with it swiftly and concisly. It will take five to ten minutes to accept or reject her and any other horse that does not walk out for me. If none walk or they come in a bunch the race is dismissed.

If one or two are punted, there will be a further four or five minutes of accesing the odds within twenty minuts of racetime, on how to secure return of over $7 to the dollar in Win, Parlay or Exotics. The Exotics where your strengths are greatest. In bets that it can be done, split a Bank Unit.

Over $7

That is the price you much achieve to make a living, using the soundess of Selection Methods.
What was the average price of winners last Saturday?........six point something? What will they be for wednesday thursday and next saturday?.....six point something?

It rises and falls from week to month to year but always swings back to an even keel. It does in each racing climate. The only way it changes is when drastic changes happen to the climate of racing, and that takes decades.
The game itself is throwing up a figure to attack.
I do not base the odds on this. I based them on years of recording my activities and the findings flash them up. They just coincide with what has been glaringly obvious to everyone on the punt.

Records

Everyone knows how important they are to keep. I have not kept betting records since April 2001. The only recordings I make are on horses.


Staking and Betting Bank

The talk of huge Betting Banks and the need for high turnover with slim Profit on Turnover are the cruelest words ever laid before a punter. They are junk food.
Sound Selection, sound Opinion and sound Staking are the correct food for punters. Loosing runs remain small, with the odd rare bad stretch that never extends to a point of near collapse.
A $2,000 bank of $100 units, $4,000 bank of $200. Plenty for a Starting Bank.
A Starting Bank is there to build quickly, to build into a Betting Bank. Then the Units are upped to a stage of what most refer to as each punters comfort zone.
A Bank is not meant to be built to a stage of unuseabuility. The profit must taken and the Bank stripped back down to where a comfort level rests.

Why is it that some punters think low and slow? Why? A long slow painful progression is not how you build a Bank, and low Odds are not to be accepted.

Progressive Staking

No Good. None of them. They will ruin. The only Progression that must take place is a rise of the Level Stake unit in a Betting Bank. The rise is at discrection, but only after a Bank has grown to keep in line with a warranted rise.

Each Way
No.

Place
Only in a parlay bet.

Disipline

Dogs, Trots, Poker, Casino's, Pokies, Two Up. All gambling has to stop. The only exceptions are small Tattslotto tickets and Bingo. While I dont play Tatts, I think it is just cruel to take it away from those that do. And some Bingo Halls are just the best way to wind down once in a blue moon. Laughing along with some old dears, it's a crack up.



Cutting down on needless things in punting is important to keep yourself fresh. Other hobbys and sports take a lot of compulsion away too. There are more than enough puntable races in a month that you do not have to chase anything.

[Chrome Prince]

Yep - No surprises there!

Crash, it's ironic that you criticise me for criticising TheEasyRun, yet you yourself are the first to stick the boot into anything that doesn't fit YOUR method of handicapping and punting.

A little even balance might go a long way.

[partypooper]

I'm listening INTENTLY?????

[crash]

Your not having a mid-life crisis are you chrome :-)) ?

Righto EasyRun, now we get the gist except for your psychology [you either have it for this game or you haven't]. I can see where your coming from except for 2 areas. You seem to understand that winning at this game is to a large degree understanding horses themselves. If you do you would also know horses are pretty one dimensional as far as race running goes. I find it a bit strange that you leave out 'pace' as being an important consideration [?].

The other point is:
Quote:"Weight, Barrier Draw, Jockey or Trainer, Sectional Times, Barrier Trials, Gear, Steward Reports, Ratings, Systems, Track Conditions, ctdw and all their variations'. End quote.
None of these should have a bearing on the Selection Process.End quote.

I agree wuth you about ratings and systems only so far they are not on any handicapping or serious money making radar of my own.

So if a horse presents for you well [having satisfied your criteria], none of the above mean anything? A 4kg. claiming apprentice [or even a 3kg.] on a mid-pacer in barrier 3 in a field of 14 runners on a small track would be a good bet would it, as long as the horse 'walks for you"?

A runner with glue-on shoes or bar plates [not that you would know as you never check] wouldn't bother you or your well protected betting roll?

I'd be interested to hear your explanation about those couple [examples] of points, because race pace, a horse's natural running style and has it got a barrier and jockey to suit [?] are all very important to this punter anyway. I certainly take notice of the trainer, track condt. to suit the runner [and the type of track: small/large] to name a few interests. Weight and time aren't out of the ballpark of my attention either.

Still, there is more than one way to skin a cat and a sharp knife would be my first choice. I'm interested to hear a further explanation of yours. Thanks for the interesting posts so far.

[syllabus23]

We are about to hear something that we havn't read a hundred times ????

[crash]

Well at least he got to his point. I don't know about all this 'walking' though.

If a horse don't go for a decent canter to get the air out of it's spleen and ready it's lungs for the race before heading for the starting gates, it's their for the scenery in my opinion.

A good trainer feeds his horses well and his runners will usually be race fit, so the trainer has to be important as small trainers scrimp on feed quality, vets, etc. etc. It's no surprise their horses mostly lose.

Negative gear [gear changes] has to be important. If I see front leg wraps first time or front leg wraps again [tendon problems] the runner won't see a cent of my money. Same applies to lugging bits, cross-over nose bands, tail chains or bar plates. In fact just about any gear changes [except for trainers who always use front wraps to keep other trainers guessing], keeps my money away.

[Chrome Prince]

At last some sanity to this whole thing.

Agreed syllabus!

[Tubby]

Does any horse walk out of the Field Listing?
Would you mind explaining this a bit...I am not sure if you mean to "walk" and "list" in a literal sense or if this is a figure of speech?

[Filante]

I must admit to being somewhat baffled, Easy.

Doubtless I'm not alone.

Perhaps you could explain with some concrete examples for the upcoming Saturday city meetings. Just (say) three selections with your reasoning behind each of them.

[mv2040]

Weight, Barrier Draw, Jockey or Trainer, Sectional Times, Barrier Trials, Gear, Steward Reports, Ratings, Systems, Track Conditions, ctdw and all their variations.
None of these should have a bearing on the Selection Proccess.Sorry TheEasyRun i cant agree with you on that one. Weight, barrier draw and sectionals have a direct influence on the race. For instance a noted leader running in a 1000m race at Ipswich that has drawn badly with speed everywhere inside it faces a huge task as opposed to the exact same field/barriers at a course like Warwick Farm. As for weight, well "weight can stop a train"!

IMO working out a speed map along with each runners potential final 600 would be one of the first things i would be looking at. Granted if the horse is not fit then its not going to win no matter what. But take Lonhro's last run against Grand Armee, Beasley walked the first 1400 and with Grand Armee capable of coming home in around 34, with Lonhro so far back he would have had to break 32 seconds for his last 600! Not possible.

[mv2040]

Those who have none to offer and need to resort to the lowest level of debate [name calling and character assassination] belong in a school ground gang, not a public forum.
Agreed!!!

[Tubby]

I have to agree with MV2040 (and Crash alluded to it also) that even if a horse is in good condition and its last run suggested it might improve, if its running style doesn't suit the likely pattern of the race (i.e. leaders dawdling the first 600m or going like the clappers first 600m) it will struggle.

[Chrome Prince]

Crikey, are we all so thin skinned that a bit of debate gets to this!

Possibly the best post for propogating opinion in ages.

But that does not mean I have to have my arm twisted to agree with him - surely.

To each their own, I am not criticising him, just his "advice".

I do not believe that it is something someone else should follow especially given the dollar figures.

The maths is flawed - blind freddy could see that.

Much of what he states is logical and good, but there is a lot that is just plain illogical.

By passing comment (not putting the boot in) I now am the subject of the same treatment.

It doesn't take a mathematician to see that it doesn't add up, and anyone following this path will lose their bank!

For the record I did not agree with the names, I agreed with this....

think the words "social conscience" fit in here somewhere.

There are several threads in here where posters refer to $2 bets.I applaud those people.They are enjoying the sport and clearly operating well within their budget.

Once again,,Encouraging people with low incomes to "invest" (ha ha) in the region of 20% of their annual earnings stinks.

[brave chief]

Judgement

Class in a horse is only held in it's Fitness, and by the way that fitness is trained on or trained out.


Are you saying Class is Fitness, and Fitness is Class?? That doesnt make any sense to me, and taken by itself that statement is false. IMO, ""class"" is comprised of certain elements, of which Fitness isn't one. Its a completely different thing altogether.


Weight, Barrier Draw, Jockey or Trainer, Sectional Times, Barrier Trials, Gear, Steward Reports, Ratings, Systems, Track Conditions, ctdw and all their variations.
None of these should have a bearing on the Selection Proccess.

So there's no need for conventional form analysis?

[maverick1993]

Track Conditions have no bearing ?? .. i dont understand this one ..
Barriers aswell ...i agree a fit , class horse can over come a bad barrier but barrier postions cant be ignored...a good horse can overcome a wide barrier depending on its barrier speed and the run into the first turn..,,

example : Rashini last weekend at Doomben...the horse is flying but from that outside barrier raced wide the whole way and was a certainty beaten..

I agree with just about everything else though..
especially staking and your thoughts on progressive stakings...

must admit i'm still confused on your selection method though...

Unless your on track and a good judge on horse flesh and even then fitness is hard to judge... Most trainers have a there own full size track with stable mates to run against...,,its hard to judge how much work they've done and especaily how much fast work.....
You can get a gauge a horses fitness sometimes by guessing there intended target race and how they've gone first up ...but its still not an exact science..

Great thread Easy..i hope you keep it going and explain to us novices exactly how you go about your selection process..

[Sahasastar]

My two cents..

Back to the original thread and lets look at it for what it is....

The blokes assuming $6,000 can be turned into $50,000 in 1 year on
$7.00 selections. (I certainly hope he doesn't mean returning 700% each time on average.. that would have to be impossible.)

Let's assume his strike rate is 1 in 5.. and he makes $7.50 on average.
An extremely healthy 50% POT, hard to acheive these results but certainly not impossible if your selection processes are thrifty.

I ran a drawdown simulation 50 times on these excellent returns over 1000 bets, the average drawdown was 33.3 units. Now factoring in an unexpected bad run might occur the average of the highest 25 drawdown results is 41 units. Let's say we are prepared to bet on this very successful system aggressively and are happy in the knowledge that if a bad run might occur we are very confident we'll still be okay as our betting is geared towards this bad run happening.

So we'll bet 1.2% of our account (factoring in the 41 units drawdown might occur). That's saying if the bad run occurs in the near future we won't lose more that 50% of our account.

So the starting bet on $6,000 would be $72.00.

How many bets using this method to turn $6,000 into $50,000?

Assuming each time we bet our 1.2%.. and get back 1.8% on average.
It would take just over 350 bets to turn $6,000 into $50,000. (The power of compound interest!)
(The next year that $50,000 would be over $400,000)

That is 1 bet per day, starting at $72 bets. Certainly not impossible if one has the selections.

If you've been doing it long enough how hard would it be to find just 1 horse out of the 100 odd that race every day that is 50% or more over the odds.. just 1 horse.

So let's stop ridiculing the guy and hear what he has got to say.

[Marcus]

I think a lot of you are barking up the wrong tree saying TheEasyrun has encouraged people to bet a large part of their income on the horses. I'm not the smartest of people but I reckon he was saying you've got to have an intimate knowledge of horses appearances, personalities, behaviour etc. in the mounting yard then you can pick plenty of winners. That rules out just about everone from betting on the horses. Im also sure those who know horses best like trainers also know that what TheEasyrun said does not work. Thats why so many stable plunges miss out. Also look at sportspeople. Good physical appearance doesn't mean they will win. Most look up to the task.
Asking TheEasyrun to give you some selections for tomorrow won't work either, because the horses arent in the mounting yard now.

[Moderator 3]

On our interpretation the TheEasyRun is simply posting that from his perspective of what is a small starting bank, $4,000 can make about $30,000 profit in a year, and a starting bank of $6,000 can make about $50,000 profit in a year.

Maybe some forum members would feel more comfortable if TheEasyRun had posted that a small starting bank like $400 can make about $3000 in a year?

However, is there a difference? Anyone can extrapolate from a bank of $400 making about $3000 in a year that a bank of $4,000 can make $30,000 in a year!

Anyone can extrapolate from a profit made using $2 bets what the profit would have been using $10 bets, $20 bets, $100 bets, $200 bets and so on...

So even if TheEasyRun had posted that a small starting bank like $400 can make about $3000 in a year, the average person earning $30,000 would be able to work out that a bank of $4000 could make $30,000 in a year and a bank of $8,000 could make $60,000 in a year.

Whether or not a profit of $3,000 in a year can actually be made from a starting bank of $400 or a profit of $30,000 in a year can actually be made from a starting bank of $4000 has been substantiated by TheEasyRun is our opinion the main issue.

Moderator.




3. It's quite false that a very high starting bank of $10,000 to $30,000 or more is needed to start a betting bank off. And false also is the thinking that the bank must be turned over and over like it was inside a washing machine.
The fact is a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!

Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.....


Happy Hunting
TheEasyRun

[bradw]

Having just finished reading the 80 odd posts in this thread, I asked myself the simple of question of "What new information am I taking away with me?"

The answer, "NOTHING"

TheEasyRun has provided nothing more than the fact the he/she believes the fittest horse will win providing it has sufficient class and no other factors need to be looked at.

On one level I can agree with this. If the other factors were taken into account you could probably avoid some losers but wouldn't find new winners.

All in all nothing new to anyone who has the slightest amount of knowledge about the horse racing game.

I would suggest to TheEasyRun to provide a workout for a race, as this may provide something new and innovative that we have not seen before.

Brad

[syllabus23]

Quote Crash

I've never been any of those professions you quoted [I can spell mathematician and individual though] so I wouldn't know and the guy never got half a chance to explain his reasoning did he.


Lolol Crash I missed your cheap shot.The paragraph containing those spelling errors was a quote from your mate The easy run.

Brad I totally agree with what you say.

If you look back at page seven you will see that brave chief was pretty close to the money,in his opening statement.

As far as studying horses on the track Geoffrey Hutson's book "Watching Racehorses" produces excellent advice with regard to the behavioural patterns of racehorses.

In that book Dr.Hutson says,and I quote, "Fitness is hard,if not impossible to measure simply by looking at a horse".Of course Geoffrey Hutson is one of those post war educated idiots.Though he too can probably spell mathematician and individual...Unlike (as our friend Crash so aptly points out)
The easy run.

[partypooper]

Bradw, like I said I'm still listening "INTENTLY"

[crash]

Quote Crash

I've never been any of those professions you quoted [I can spell mathematician and individual though] so I wouldn't know and the guy never got half a chance to explain his reasoning did he.

Lolol Crash I missed your cheap shot.The paragraph containing those spelling errors was a quote from your mate The easy run.

The easy run.

Lolol here too mate. I was aware it was a quote [bleeding obvious, as it had 'Quote' on each end of it]. No use claiming it for a cheap shot at yourself. It was meant for the writer, Meaning, if your going to dismiss people due to profession [or whatever], at least spell them right.

See, I lambaste everyone equally:-))

[xanadu]

I've been following this thread with great interest and IMO the most pertinent details/facts were contributed in Post88 by Sahasastar. He succinctly put the mathematical evaluation of this complicated issue into a simple formula which is easily digested by the wider betting public.
More such practical evaluations of complex issues of this kind please!

Cheers.

[syllabus23]

Quote Moderator 3

"Whether or not a profit of $3,000 in a year can actually be made from a starting bank of $400 or a profit of $30,000 in a year can actually be made from a starting bank of $4000 has been substantiated by TheEasyRun is our opinion the main issue"


The owners of this site have told us repeatedly over a period of years (to my own knowledge) that the above proposition is unrealistic,and I totally agree with that.(not impossible,not much is,but not credible.)

The easy run seems to be claiming his results are the result of watching horses.If that is the case,other than posting his betting history it will be difficult.(to say the least),to ascertain the veracity of his claims.

As I said earlier,it's all been good for a laugh.and probably racks up a few hits on the site.

[Moderator 3]

The last paragraph from the Moderator post could be better worded as follows:

Can a profit of $3,000 in a year actually be made from a starting bank of $400?

Can a profit of $30,000 in a year actually be made from a starting bank of $4000?

This is the main issue brought up by TheEasyRun and needs to be substantiated.

Moderator.

On our interpretation the TheEasyRun is simply posting that from his perspective of what is a small starting bank, $4,000 can make about $30,000 profit in a year, and a starting bank of $6,000 can make about $50,000 profit in a year.

Maybe some forum members would feel more comfortable if TheEasyRun had posted that a small starting bank like $400 can make about $3000 in a year?

However, is there a difference? Anyone can extrapolate from a bank of $400 making about $3000 in a year that a bank of $4,000 can make $30,000 in a year!

Anyone can extrapolate from a profit made using $2 bets what the profit would have been using $10 bets, $20 bets, $100 bets, $200 bets and so on...

So even if TheEasyRun had posted that a small starting bank like $400 can make about $3000 in a year, the average person earning $30,000 would be able to work out that a bank of $4000 could make $30,000 in a year and a bank of $8,000 could make $60,000 in a year.

Whether or not a profit of $3,000 in a year can actually be made from a starting bank of $400 or a profit of $30,000 in a year can actually be made from a starting bank of $4000 has been substantiated by TheEasyRun is our opinion the main issue.

Moderator.

[bradw]

Moderator,

You are spot on.

Every forum has people spruiking all sorts of holy grail methods but very few are ever substantiated. Anyone can post the "Rules of Punting", but actually using them and making a profit from horse racing is a totally different thing.

In my opinion the hardest part of making a profit is having the correct mental attitude to handle the peaks and troughs that occur to one's capital. It is the ability to be able to treat punting as a business and no longer a hobby/enjoyable interest that is the real challenge.

I find it difficult going to the track with a couple of selections and not having a few more bets to fill in the day. This is a discipline I am working on this racing year.

[Chrome Prince]

Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.

If no one else can see that this is in fact impossible to sustain and the chance of losing a year's wages or even a $500 bank betting on 7/1 shots, is actually odds-on probably 1/20, then I just give up.

Unless you can pick one in two winners @7/1, then it might be possible, but there is reality to deal with!

I'll have a wee look at Sahasastar's post:

Let's assume his strike rate is 1 in 5.. and he makes $7.50 on average.
An extremely healthy 50% POT, hard to acheive these results but certainly not impossible if your selection processes are thrifty.

I ran a drawdown simulation 50 times on these excellent returns over 1000 bets, the average drawdown was 33.3 units. Now factoring in an unexpected bad run might occur the average of the highest 25 drawdown results is 41 units. Let's say we are prepared to bet on this very successful system aggressively and are happy in the knowledge that if a bad run might occur we are very confident we'll still be okay as our betting is geared towards this bad run happening.

And just how exactly is TheEasyRun or anyone else going to make $5,000 per month betting 2% of a $6,000 bank on each selection?????????

The average drawdown matters not one iota, it's the maximum drawdown that will bust the bank. Some simple calculations tell you that to earn $5,000 per month, your selections have to be invested in far too heavily on too small a bank and therefore it would not take anywhere near the maximum drawdown to kill the bank.


So we'll bet 1.2% of our account (factoring in the 41 units drawdown might occur). That's saying if the bad run occurs in the near future we won't lose more that 50% of our account.


I agree protect the bank, but how are we going to make $5,000 to match our monthly wage with a $72.00 bet at 7/1, even if it wins?


How many bets using this method to turn $6,000 into $50,000?


If he has a phenomenal strike rate not that many, but I don't think he's going to find that many bets @7/1 that fit his criteria AND win in any month!


If you've been doing it long enough how hard would it be to find just 1 horse out of the 100 odd that race every day that is 50% or more over the odds.. just 1 horse.


Crikey, if it were that easy (forgive the pun), everyone would do it.
That 1 horse has to win and that is exactly what has not been factored in anywhere - when they don't win.

All this pie in the sky stuff is what dreams are made of, reality pays the bills!


So let's stop ridiculing the guy and hear what he has got to say.


If you do the math properly it's obvious that he is the one ridiculing us and it appears that only myself and one or two others have picked up on this.

Very surprised, when the basics are faulty.

[Sahasastar]

Rightio.... Chrome.

The 50 sims I ran the worst drawdown was 58 units.
On the sim I had already factored in the 37th worst drawdown result (half of bottom half). You could reasonably expect it to be around half of the sims.. only 33 units.. not the 41 I done it on. No-one knows the exact drawdown, it's impossible to get it exactly right. So I played the percentages, yet still overcooked it to be safe.

Let alone not running the expected drawdown on only the 350 bets. I would say the expected drawdown that could occur would decrease significantly with such a small sample of bets. Yet I still ran the test over the longer term.

Now, assuming the 2% chance of the worst drawdown did happen - 58 units
(1 in 50 chance of the 58 units occuring)...

Betting 1.2% x 58 units = lose 70% of bank.. Broke.. certainly not!!!
I'd suggest the system might need reviewing though, or it'd take balls to ride out of the rough trot and stick to it.

..or recalculate your bet percentage for a 58 unit drawdown if that makes you happy... 0.8%. The power of compound interest would at a guess turn the 350 bets into maybe 450-500 bets at worst without running a sim. Slightly over a year at 1 per day, but still PFG.

Surely you Chrome understand that we don't care if the overlay on the day does not win.. it's the average return WHEN THEY WIN!!.. a winner each 5th day at $7.50 on long term averages.
Was that part hard to understand for you, I'll explain it on a blackboard for you with big writing in chalk.

Previous 12 months results on a few of my betting systems:

Just a small sample.

51 sel, $122 ret, 29% srw, 59% srpl.
56 sel, $119 ret, 27% srw, 61% srpl.
74 bets, $130 ret, 39% srw, 67% srpl.
86 bets, $151 ret, 25% srw, 51% srpl.
60 bets, $86 ret, 22% srw, 52% srpl.

That's about 300 bets in the last year returning 70% profit.. once again, I under-estimated my simulation for fear of not being believed.

With the amount of place getters to winners, I can certainly expect these returns to continue.

I agree that 1 year would be pushing it.. but CAN IT BE DONE!
Absolutely without a doubt it can be done, someone is doing it out there, and I expect to be doing it real soon.

Would I bet these percentages though? If I was returning the figures quoted I'd have no problem at all betting 1% of my account.. and as my account grows by 1% each time. Diminish my bets be 1%. Easy.

[TheEasyRun]

Chrome Prince.

Nowhere have I mentioned 7-1 shots or how to stake them. I thought I made it quite clear that a bet should not be made unless it can return over $7 for every dollar bet.
A 7-1 win bet is fine, a 14-1 win bet even better, and a 28-1 better still. A 4 or 5-1 win bet needs a single parlay, but any win price lower than that needs dismissing. And those I will show how to stake.
Exotics were mentioned though. Not an exotic punter?

Mod 3 said
[ Can a profit of $3,000 in a year actually be made from a starting bank of $400?

Can a profit of $30,000 in a year actually be made from a starting bank of $4000?

This is the main issue brought up by TheEasyRun and needs to be substantiated.

Moderator. ]

I'll go one better Mod 3.

[TheEasyRun]

The next few pages will go into detail on the subjects I've already mentioned. Then onto new ones, including why an yearly average Profit on Turnover of less than 80% should be cause for worry.
After the last chapter it will be time to play.


Unfortunently, what with the time constaints involved of finding $7 shots to tip to unsuspecting battlers, and standing at the mounting yard sticking pins in horses, it will take a few weeks to set it up.
Plus this is not yet the right time of year to have a full Punting Stable.

[Sahasastar]

Time to pull out of the debate for me when the *********
It's irrelevant anyway.. if you have decent overs of 20-30% or more long term and bet them sensibly you'll make a killing anyway.

[Chrome Prince]

Time to pull out of the debate for me when the administrator starts sticking up for his *********
It's irrelevant anyway.. if you have decent overs of 20-30% or more long term and bet them sensibly you'll make a killing anyway.
Sahasastar, in fact the Moderator told me to give the Easyrun a fair go, so I don't know where you pulled that one from????

There is no dispute on making a killing at 30% POT either.

The issue, for me, is trying to exude $5000 a month out of a $6000 bank regularly on 7/1 shots, which in fact TheEasyRun did suggest. One would need a lot more bets at greater risk to the bank, and the risk is what has been overlooked in my opinion.

and I'll ask the same question again, either you want to bet $72 on each 7/1 shot to preserve the bank (in my opinion the right way to stake, just not the right method here) or you want to make $5,000 per month off a $6,000 bank...which is it, because you cannot have both - it doesn't add up.

If you ever make it add up, you can do all my betting for me and I'll be a very rich man ;)

[partypooper]

gawd, I don't know if I can survive the SUSPENSE!!!!!!

[crash]

The system and maths boys here are perhaps looking into the wrong envelope on this [their own]. Nothing wrong with that as we all tend to see the world through our own glasses, but it might be missing TheEasyRun's point on staking completely. Hopefully he'll get to a couple of examples to clarify what in some peoples books, can't work.

I don't bet a set % of bank and mostly never have and I'm sure their are plenty of other punters who don't either. I bet mostly flat stakes to win [a bit of place too] but as to staking amount or % of bank it's a [rough] sliding scale depending on the odds and what exposure to loss I feel the bet has.

Generally the average punter bets the largest amounts on the smallest odds and the smallest amount on the largest odds. To many punters that is just crazy as then odds alone are being used as a risk assessment [the punter has no faith in their own assessment ability] and that leads to confusion about SP odds and true odds and also the smallest returns from the best overlay opportunities.

I had three bets yesterday, all with differing odds and exposure to loss based on my own personal judgement. My largest bet [Campeche] paid 4/1 and my smallest [On Bail] paid just over evens. My middling bet [Beautiful Dragon] started at 6/1 and lost. My evens bet was the smallest because it had the least overlay value even though I gave it the best chance of winning. The middle size bet I felt had the most loss exposure, but it was the largest bet in my opinion that has the best value. However, it could have been the 6/1 bet with the largest bet amount if I had felt differently about it's exposure to loss.
Looking at it in pot terms, my profit for the year is running at about 35%, but if all bets had been the same size % of my bank, the profit would be about 20% pot. I'm sure there are much better punters out there than I am.

I'm sure there are plenty of other punter with a similar staking outlook to myself and sitting down with a calculator and working out what is and isn't possible, just never enters our radar. We just bet and keep tabs on progress [or lack there of] and our noses to the ground looking for good bets, not better staking theories of what's possible and what isn't.

[syllabus23]

Ahhh,the waters are being muddied by mathematics.

Lets see the selection method !

[jfc]

I'd certainly want more than $7 odds about any new quality contributors here after they witness the hostile xenophobic reception given to TheEasyRun for his debut effort.

Presuming he is genuine there is no harm in what he posted and he should be given an opportunity to have his say, rather than being subjected to well-worn despicable tactics such as conveniently misquoting him in order to start a stoush. The challenges should wait until he's been heard out.

There are a number of regulars who would benefit far more from some firm scepticism.

----

Now apropos CP's perplexing position:

Assume fractional odds of 6/1 (= 7$ decimal).

And a 36% POT - hardly that staggering for a selective system, particularly when you contrast that with the p57-esque headlines now embraced by management.

And apply the Kelly Criterion.

That means staking 6% of your bank.

With average luck that equates to notionally growing your bank by 2.16% a bet.

So you'd expect your bank to double after 33 bets.

And triple after 52 bets. Not very long to wait.

If you start with $2,000 betting $120 (and keep your day job as TER stated) then it won't be that long before that triples to $6,000 and $360 bets.

Then cap your betting at that because it gets far more trickier and uncomfortable in leviathan mode.

How much the above fits in with TRE's scheme is yet unknown.

But until we hear more, TRE's claims have not been proved outrageous.

[Chrome Prince]

And if Darren Beadman rides the card in Sydney 4 consecutive times, it won't be long......

The reality is it could happen, but the odds are well and truly against it.

Let's remember we are talking about 7/1 shots.

Run of outs is inevitable.

Even at 30% POT, how long do you think it will take to triple the bank on 7/1 shots?

You're not going to make $5,000 per month.

And you jfc, a master at numbers, surely you can see what will happen even if the "system" is even a little out of luck.

[jfc]

And if Darren Beadman rides the card in Sydney 4 consecutive times, it won't be long......

The reality is it could happen, but the odds are well and truly against it.

Let's remember we are talking about 7/1 shots.

Run of outs is inevitable.

Even at 30% POT, how long do you think it will take to triple the bank on 7/1 shots?

You're not going to make $5,000 per month.

And you jfc, a master at numbers, surely you can see what will happen even if the "system" is even a little out of luck.

CP,

I remind you that the Kelly Criterion formula is the Bank fraction:

Edge/Odds

So the relatively large (fractional) odds of 6/1 are factored into that.

If, for argument's sake, the odds were 2/1 with a 36% Edge then you would expect to triple your bank in only 18 bets.

The formula assumes average luck. It's not too hard to find free on-line graphical Kelly calculators to demonstrate how fickle luck is. But anyone unable to cope with that should find another recreation.

I recall an account by Blackjack entrepreneur Ken Uston where he endured ~30 (from memory) consecutive losing full-time days, but then things picked up again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Uston

Those twits that infest forums with their fanciful ponderings about quitting their day jobs to gamble full-time would do well to consider how they'd like to handle such inevitable runs outside their control, with nothing to fall back on.

[mv2040]

If, for argument's sake, the odds were 2/1 with a 36% Edge then you would expect to triple your bank in only 18 bets.

Hmm how exactly do you work this out? Backing how many winners? What if you back 1 winner, 2 winners etc.... If your trying to make a profit form horse racing and you are using mathematical formulas your wasting your time.

[partypooper]

nothing like a good debate to bring out the "true colours"

[Shaun]

Hmm how exactly do you work this out? Backing how many winners? What if you back 1 winner, 2 winners etc.... If your trying to make a profit form horse racing and you are using mathematical formulas your wasting your time.

Are you kidding, punting is all about mathematicl formulas.

If the bookies didn't use them they would go broke, we use them every day to find winners, it is also the way you can understand if you can make a profit or not.

If i said to you can you make a good profit if you have a win strike of 31% with an average divi of $3.74 can you give me the answer and the profits.

A few years back a couple of punters on here came up with a risk free system to win on the punt all because of mathematics.

[mv2040]

Sorry i might have been misunderstood.... i do agree that you can use mathematics to your advanyage to maximise profit and minimise your loses but to say you can "triple your money" in 18 bets buy some formula is completely false.

Of course if the bookies didnt use them they would go broke, but anyone framing a market down to 130-140% at best would be able to make a tidy profit.

[armchairjock]

nothing like a good debate to bring out the "true colours"


too true party,,let me know when it starts will ya LOL

[mv2040]

A few years back a couple of punters on here came up with a risk free system to win on the punt all because of mathematics.Not possible. If you are betting on the TAB or any bookmaker i have come across. Unless you can find one with a market under 100%

[Chrome Prince]

Are you kidding, punting is all about mathematicl formulas.

If the bookies didn't use them they would go broke, we use them every day to find winners, it is also the way you can understand if you can make a profit or not.


Spot on Shaun!

It would have to be the best advice on this entire thread.

[go4it]

Having just spent the past few hours reading this entire post from go to whoa I cannot believe the levels of critisiscm,the verbal jousting,and the somewhat blatant hypocrisy from some of the more regular posters.I am only new on here but I have browsed the archives,so I know most of the regulars by their handle.No wonder Mark put himself into voluntary exile!Is this forum so dominated by regulars that anyone new that ventures an opinion that is outside the square gets shot down in flames from the word go?Without a chance to explain in detail where they are coming from?Would appear that way to me.What everyone seems to be missing with this,the guy never mentioned backing single bets @7/1,he originally stated you need to get a return of$7 for every $ invested.Maybe I'm just stupid,but as far as I can see,he has not been given any sort of a fair chance to explain how he does it.When I first joined I had intended to post a trifecta strategy that I use,but there is absolutely buckleys chance of that happening after reading this post!

[Mr. Logic]

When I first joined I had intended to post a trifecta strategy that I use, but there is absolutely buckleys chance of that happening after reading this post!

Assuming your trifecta strategy works, and I have no reason to think otherwise, if others reading about it followed your ideas and came up with the same selections, then there would be "buckleys chance" of it continuing to work as well. The reason is obvious. The tote is going to win no matter how many people get the trifecta. So the more winning dollars on it, the smaller the dividend it pays to everyone.

[go4it]

Mr Logic.

thanks for your reply,and yes,logically speaking you are quite right.However,as my method is "outside the square" there aint' much chance of that happening.

The greater percentage of rank and file punters will take a 3 horse box or stand a hot fav as a banker with the field hoping for roughies to fill the placings.A lesser percentage will box 4 horses,and an even lesser percentage will box 5 horses.They will never win long term,or short term either.

Boxing is a shortcut to the poorhouse.

However,I am being quite rude in digressing from Easyruns original post

cheers

[crash]

So now we have punting being all about 'mathematical formula' .
OK, so any half decent shopkeeper [or maths teacher for that matter] should be a punting marvel !

Punting has never been about maths [any idiot can use a calculator]. Maths is involved sure, but so is breathing air. All the maths ability in the world won't tell you who is going to win the next race. If there was a maths formula for winning on the punt, everyone would have it by now and there'd be no punting industry.

[syllabus23]

Ahhh Crash,,the planets have collided.I agree with you. :))

We are up to post 120 in this thread and so far TheEasyRun has said nothing.

He has told us "what he is going to tell us" but so far he hasnt told us.

We have digressed into mathematical probabilities and possibilities,as Bob Dylan said,"There's a battle out there and it's raging".But so far,after 120 posts nothing of any consequence has emerged.

It's not a question of a new poster with new ideas being lambasted.Other than a couple of,"I can do such and such" statements, no new ideas have been forthcoming,and the whole thread has degenerated into something akin to an American soap opera.

Anyway I'm sure there are more episodes.

[crash]

I agree and aren't most of us glued to our tele every night watching them [soap operas].

[jfc]

Hopefully TheInsideEdge will start a new thread when he continues. For blatantly obvious reasons.

Meanwhile, Crash,

the recent superiority of pragmatic mathematicians in this caper is now well-documented and cannot convincingly be disputed.

The really useful maths involved is not taught here in traditional institutions but thanks to the Internet those with the basics can eventually ferret the gems out.

If they persevere then AssumeTheCrown and maybe some other youngsters here can look forward to expiring as billionaires.

Those longer in the tooth can only aspire to a fraction of that.

[breadman]

So now we have punting being all about 'mathematical formula' .
OK, so any half decent shopkeeper [or maths teacher for that matter] should be a punting marvel !

Punting has never been about maths [any idiot can use a calculator]. Maths is involved sure, but so is breathing air. All the maths ability in the world won't tell you who is going to win the next race. If there was a maths formula for winning on the punt, everyone would have it by now and there'd be no punting industry.



[any idiot can use a calculator]

you havent met my missus have you crash. LOL

[Chrome Prince]

So now we have punting being all about 'mathematical formula' .
OK, so any half decent shopkeeper [or maths teacher for that matter] should be a punting marvel !

Punting has never been about maths [any idiot can use a calculator]. Maths is involved sure, but so is breathing air. All the maths ability in the world won't tell you who is going to win the next race. If there was a maths formula for winning on the punt, everyone would have it by now and there'd be no punting industry.

Crash I believe you are confusing picking winners with punting to make a profit.

Any idiot can pick winners, the challenge lies in making a profit and that is where the maths comes in.

I could pick 30 to 40% of winners and still lose because the odds are against me.

Maths is used to find the winners that are value.

The whole gambling industry revolves around maths as Shaun said, that's how bookies and Betfair "traders" make their profit.

While the actual handicapping is the first stage, it's all pointless if you can't make a profit from it.

[Shaun]

Punting has never been about maths [any idiot can use a calculator]. Maths is involved sure, but so is breathing air. All the maths ability in the world won't tell you who is going to win the next race. If there was a maths formula for winning on the punt, everyone would have it by now and there'd be no punting industry.

I never said it was the only thing to punting, but it is a big part of it.

Don Scott used maths to find the best weighted horse in a race.

Many now use time ratings to work out the best prospect to bet on.

It is possible to pick winners and make a profit by just using maths, as it is possible to do the same with out maths.

[partypooper]

Syallbus23, Glad to see you are fan of "The Man" from way back!!!!! you could also say "The loser now will later the Win", but there again I'm just a "Fanciful Twit"

[beberrycareful]

I agree and aren't most of us glued to our tele every night watching them [soap operas].


NA!

[crash]

[QUOTE=Chrome Prince]Crash, I believe you are confusing picking winners with punting to make a profit.
Any idiot can pick winners, the challenge lies in making a profit and that is where the maths comes in.
QUOTE]

Chrome,
You have the art of mis-direction down to a fine art [I said: 'any idiot can use a calculator' which you have mis-directed to mean: 'any idiot can pick winners' etc. etc.

Only you could interpret [imply] from my post that what I referred to as 'punting' in the context of my post, meant anything else than making a profit and then move smoothly into reverse gear back to maintaining punting is all about mathematical formula: 'The whole gambling industry revolves around maths as Shaun said, that's how bookies and Betfair "traders" make their profit'.

The whole universe revolves around maths, but as with many pastimes, maths won't make you a good living from it. See how good a golfer, chess player, surfboard rider or lawn bowls player [or 'successful' punter] you can become with your mathematical formulas chrome :-))

PS: I ain't never seen you shine here picking winners mate, but you sure talk about it a lot [of hot air?] :-),

[go4it]

No wonder the Big Easy Run has done just that,run like Hell!!What started out(and was mentioned by many)as a very interesting thread has degenerated into a slanging match.Just as an aside,anyone interested in the mathematical side should read Commonsense Punting by Rodger Dedman and Mathematically Speaking by Malcom Knowles.I personally use a mathematical formula to work out approx. divs for my trifectas,NOT as a selection method,and yes,I am one of "those idiots"that has to use a calculator.

[Chrome Prince]

Chrome,
You have the art of mis-direction down to a fine art [I said: 'any idiot can use a calculator' which you have mis-directed to mean: 'any idiot can pick winners' etc. etc.

Only you could interpret [imply] from my post that what I referred to as 'punting' in the context of my post, meant anything else than making a profit and then move smoothly into reverse gear back to maintaining punting is all about mathematical formula: 'The whole gambling industry revolves around maths as Shaun said, that's how bookies and Betfair "traders" make their profit'.

The whole universe revolves around maths, but as with many pastimes, maths won't make you a good living from it. See how good a golfer, chess player, surfboard rider or lawn bowls player [or 'successful' punter] you can become with your mathematical formulas chrome :-))

PS: I ain't never seen you shine here picking winners mate, but you sure talk about it a lot [of hot air?] :-),

crash,

It wasn't misdirected at all, I was answering your generalization with the same mindset.
You don't need to use maths to be a good golfer, chess player, surfboard rider, lawn bowls player, nor handicapper.

You do need it to make a profit from that handicapping.

As for your wind up with the smiley face - I ain't biting.

You obviously never saw the $18,000 thread that disappeared.

The best stuff I keep to myself, the stuff in progress or trialled, I put here or in competitions as a live test.

Have you even bothered to look at the numerous threads I let disappear into the abyss because they are in huge profit?

[crash]

crash,

It wasn't misdirected at all, I was answering your generalization with the same mindset.
You don't need to use maths to be a good golfer, chess player, surfboard rider, lawn bowls player, nor handicapper.

You do need it to make a profit from that handicapping.

As for your wind up with the smiley face - I ain't biting.

You obviously never saw the $18,000 thread that disappeared.

The best stuff I keep to myself, the stuff in progress or trialled, I put here or in competitions as a live test.

Have you even bothered to look at the numerous threads I let disappear into the abyss because they are in huge profit?

Come off it chrome, don't tell me you whack up 18k profit systems here and they disappear ? The only things that disappear here are duds.

Smiley face ? OK lets have a little comp., my handicapping against your mathematical formulas. How can you lose when you keep insisting handicapping without mathematical formulas can't make a profit?

Come on mate, lets have a bit of fun and you get the big chance to show me up and demonstrate in the real world how good mathematical formulas are at making a profit on the punt :-),

[Mark]

Why is it that threads on open forums generally decline into slanging matches?

Now where are those piegeons?, 'cos here comes a big fat cat.......

Turnover for Tuesday/Wednesday.........$13178
Profit.........$415

Risk......(wait for it....) nil.
Bank $800

All using maths, no form, no handicapping, no risk.

Having said that, I believe that maths is not the only way to go, but it is my weapon of choice.

[Chrome Prince]

Come off it chrome, don't tell me you whack up 18k profit systems here and they disappear ? The only things that disappear here are duds.

Smiley face ? OK lets have a little comp., my handicapping against your mathematical formulas. How can you lose when you keep insisting handicapping without mathematical formulas can't make a profit?

Come on mate, lets have a bit of fun and you get the big chance to show me up and demonstrate in the real world how good mathematical formulas are at making a profit on the punt :-),

Crash, the thread was actually pulled after I posted my bets and profit because someone complained.

How long do you want to run the comp for?

I'm not interested in running a short comp where the guy (you or me) who flukes a few longies wins. I'd rather have one where the winner has showed a longterm profit.

You also have me quite wrong crash. You have misinterpreted what I was getting at. Maths is part of it - a huge part. I never suggested that maths alone nor handicapping alone would make a profit. What I did suggest is that both are needed.

Not no maths required nor no handicapping required.

I understand that you have no time for systems, just old fashioned handicapping, but you fail to grasp that somewhere within every one of my "mathematical systems" (and I use the term loosely) lies sound handicapping principles.

Some would say that using speed maps or backmarkers versus on pacers dependant upon barrier draw is not traditional handicapping, that either time or class handicapping is the be all and end all.

There does not have to be one or the other, what I'm saying is that neither is good enough without consideration of the other.

I'm talking win betting not laying or fielding or anything else, just straight out traditional punting.

Or would you still bet on the backmarker @ 20/1 if it were Even money and no value????

Oh, by the way, hve a look at the thread I updated a few months ago after posting it a few years ago where I said "Is nobody using this system, it's killing them".
There are numerous other threads I let sink because they win, sure there are some that don't, but the vast majority are in very big profit.

At least I consistently post tips here, win lose or draw.

I seem to remember you posting some tips, but stopped.

[mv2040]

Why is it that threads on open forums generally decline into slanging matches?

Now where are those piegeons?, 'cos here comes a big fat cat.......

Turnover for Tuesday/Wednesday.........$13178
Profit.........$415

Risk......(wait for it....) nil.
Bank $800

All using maths, no form, no handicapping, no risk.

Can i have some of what you are on sir? No risk.... please why post such nonsense?

[wesmip1]

mv2040,

Turnover for Tuesday/Wednesday.........$13178
Profit.........$415

This is very possible.

I suspect I know how he is doing it and it has definitely sparked my interest ....

Good Luck...

[Shaun]

Mark....don't bite at that....remember the last time you posted your thoughts.

[mv2040]

Yes those numbers certainly are possible but "no risk"? I think not.

[Mark]

Here we go again lads.
"I can't do it therefore no-one can"

Guess what MV, NO RISK. At no time was there ever any risk. If there was, I wouldn't do it.

[mv2040]

Guess what MV, NO RISK. At no time was there ever any risk. If there was, I wouldn't do it.Mark, unless you are backing every single horse in the race to a book less than 100% there is a risk. Or even if you are trading on betfair there still is risk, all be it minimum, but risk never the less.

If there was NO risk why wouldnt you sell your house and all of your assets and triple or quadruple your daily profits?

[Shaun]

Because those that take the bets wouldn't let this happen.

or there may be not enought liquidy to support this, i always say be happy with a little over a long time instead of trying to get a lot over a little time.

This is the number one reason most punters fail, the greed factor.

[Marcus]

Who is Theeasyrun? What secrets have we really learned from Theeasyrun? But look at all the posts and hits this thread has got. About 150 posts already!!!

[crash]

I seem to remember you posting some tips, but stopped.

A bit more mis -direction there chrome [implying because they were losing]?
You know very well why I stopped my thread 'off crash's cuff' and so does everyone else. And by the way, if you check the closing figures the POT was just over 20% [flat stakes] for a lot of 'real' bets posted in advance.

Yes, some maths were involved in the selection process but mostly good old fashioned handicapping but with a modern high tec. flavour, that the Internet age has made possible.

Anyway, this thread has been great fun [a soap opera?]. All of my posts generally and to anyone in particular have been tongue in cheek [and gee em up] comments. The thread has been a breath of fresh air for this punter at least.

I doubt we will hear more from our mysterious thread starter or his punting secrets. Fact is, in the end profitable punting involves a lot of subjective judgment at some point in the process, because for every known fact you can put a definite value on, there are 10 more you can't and that's were this game becomes an art, not a science.

If our mysterious punter had finished this thread with his part II or even part III, there would be a lot of disappointment here anyway. Nobody can put down in print [or formula] in a punting thread that second and most important part of punting ...the art of it.

Cheers.

[Mark]

Mark, unless you are backing every single horse in the race to a book less than 100% there is a risk. Or even if you are trading on betfair there still is risk, all be it minimum, but risk never the less.

If there was NO risk why wouldnt you sell your house and all of your assets and triple or quadruple your daily profits?

It was not my intention to hijack this thread so this will be may last word on the matter.

MV, show me where I said anything about backing or trading.
As for doubling or quadrupling, you can only take what's available. Your statement shows a distinct lack of knowledge as to what I'm doing.

Cheers, and keep that mind closed.

[jfc]

It was not my intention to hijack this thread so this will be may last word on the matter.

MV, show me where I said anything about backing or trading.
As for doubling or quadrupling, you can only take what's available. Your statement shows a distinct lack of knowledge as to what I'm doing.

Cheers, and keep that mind closed.

You're not prepared to disclose what you're doing.

So how are you entitled to chastise those incapable of mindreading?

For the record Mark is arbitraging. Like many others. I'd consider that trading.

Of course there's no risk as all in Mark's former profession of bookmaking are scrupulously honest. You'll always be able to snare what's apparently offered. And no one would ever try to throw a curly by welching on a sealed deal and not paying up.

[Mark]

Another knocker...........also wrong. No trading involved.

I'll stick to my exile, just not worth battling the losers.


Hey Shaun, had to give away backing the lot, got banned by the English bookies. Opened several accounts under different names but it became too cumbersome. LAYING on Betfair is much easier.

[bradw]

Mark,

I don't believe people here are "knocking" you as such.

Over time many people making all sorts of claims regarding profit making methods come and go. For this reason most regulars have become sceptics.

I would be great if someone like yourself, who has made a claim, would back it up with some evidence.

Possibly explaining what you are doing without giving away all the secrets, will appease the sceptics.

Brad

[crash]

This is cyber space.

Anyone is free to make any claim they like. The only evidence of successful punting I believe is what I see in this forum printed before a race. Not how convincing a a post sounds. Results that can be added up as loss or profit by anyone. Everything else is hot air or at best hearsay and perhaps a few desperate ego's looking for social strokes as far am I and probably many other forum readers here are concerned.

A lot of posters knock this thread for being boring and full of tipsters, but at least, regardless of whether they are winning or losing, the tipsters have the courage and interest to 'put up'.

As for the rest of the claims we hear in this cyberspace ....anyone can claim anything they like about how big or successful a punter they are, but it's only here in the 'locker room' exposed to all and sundry, real measurements can be taken if needed to verify claims made :-)

[Chrome Prince]

A bit more mis -direction there chrome [implying because they were losing]?
You know very well why I stopped my thread 'off crash's cuff' and so does everyone else. And by the way, if you check the closing figures the POT was just over 20% [flat stakes] for a lot of 'real' bets posted in advance.


crash, you know I reckon if we met we'd get on famously because we are both passionate about the punt, just come from different angles.

I was not implying they were losing. I was implying it's rare that you actually post tips.

Sometimes when one comment rubs a person the wrong way, everything written after that is taken in the same vain.

It was not intended that way.

[crash]

A bit more mis -direction there chrome [implying because they were losing]?
You know very well why I stopped my thread 'off crash's cuff' and so does everyone else. And by the way, if you check the closing figures the POT was just over 20% [flat stakes] for a lot of 'real' bets posted in advance.

Anyway, this thread has been great fun [a soap opera?]. All of my posts generally and to anyone in particular have been tongue in cheek [and gee em up] comments. The thread has been a breath of fresh air for this punter at least.
Cheers.

You take the cake Chrome. You quote the first part of the above post and tell me to lighten up? You obviously never bothered to read the second half. Or then again maybe you did but wanted to carry on with a bit of mischief :-))

[Stix]

Anyone rembember the kids show with the hand puppet Lambchops??

They have a song in it that goes.....

"This is a song that never ends,
It goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever, just be-cause......

This is a song that never ends,
It goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever, just be-cause......

This is a song that never ends.................."

[Chrome Prince]

You take the cake Chrome. You quote the first part of the above post and tell me to lighten up? You obviously never bothered to read the second half. Or then again maybe you did but wanted to carry on with a bit of mischief :-))

And that's exactly why I edited my post, because I just knew you'd take it the wrong way again.

I give up :(

[Tubby]

They have a song in it that goes.....

"This is a song that never ends,
It goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever, just be-cause......

This is a song that never ends,
It goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever, just be-cause......

This is a song that never ends.................."That made me laugh. Thanks Stix

[mv2040]

Would some please be so kind as to give us forumites the holy grail so this thread can finally be put to bed :)

Were not all going to agree......

[Shaun]

Hey Mark...sounds like the same problem Stuart had to a lesser degree.

I will have to send you some of my ideas you may be able to come up with the answers i am missing, it involves using two different bet types and hedging them against each other for a positive outcome.

[DR RON]

To those who have doubts about Marks statements, I have seen evidence of what he does and how he makes a profit, in some emails he sent me when he was helping me out with questions about betfair. His profit on turnover isnt big but it is no risk. Also if the eayrun is still with us please continue to post your thoughts. At least wait till he's posted everything before knocking him.

[Moderator 3]

Please note:

Posters are entitled to ask whether a betting method stacks up mathematically. People are entitled to disagree with a post and substantiate their position.

An inability to understand the maths of racing and handicapping, or a lack of interest in that area is fair enough.

But that does not give a poster the right here to accuse others who believe maths is important for understanding racing and handicapping of making a "personal slanging match" because they raise these issues. Nor is name calling acceptable.

Moderator.
<!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->

[Moderator 3]

By registering to use the OZmium Forums users agree to abide by the following Terms of Use.

Please note that the Forums are a free service extended by a commercial entity and are not public property. The Forum Terms of Use take precedence over freedom of expression, in the interests of maintaining this service.

People who register for the Forums may receive occasional promotional material via e-mail from OZmium Pty Ltd. This will be minimal and your e-mail address will not be passed on to any third party under any circumstances.

The OZmium Forums are minimally moderated. Postings are not checked before publication, but if any are detected that run contrary to the Terms of Use outlined here they may be edited or deleted. In extreme cases, where a breach of the law may have occurred, the appropriate authorities will be alerted.

When registering to post on the Forums please choose an appropriate user name. Obscene or overly suggestive names are not permitted. Names that double as a commercial promotion by containing the name of a site or a hyperlink are not allowed without prior permission of the Forum owners. The use of famous names as pseudonyms in cases where some readers could reasonably be expected to think that it really might be that person are not allowed. (Example: It is okay to call yourself Napoleon, but not okay to call yourself Bart Cummings, unless you are!)

Opinions and advice offered on the Forums should be treated with due caution and the owners of this site do not accept responsibility for any loss arising from it. Any opinions expressed here belong to the poster and are not endorsed by the Forum owners unless explicitly stated.

Management reserves the right to use the Forums in any way it sees fit, including the posting of commercial material.

All postings to the Forums and their subsequent threads become the property of the Forum owners. Requests for the removal of postings and their threads for reasons other than factual error, potentially defamatory content, or occasional special circumstances will in most cases not be granted.

The following types of postings are not acceptable.

Potentially defamatory or libelous.
This especially relates to the identifying of businesses, racing products, racing personalities or other individuals in a context that could harm reputations, even if justified.

Offensive language or sexual content.

Personal abuse or unpleasantness.
A member who continually alienates other members of the Forum may be restricted or banned.

Incitement of racial hatred or other activities illegal under Australian law.

Promotion of other sites in a way that might be expected to result in financial disadvantage to OZmium Pty Ltd.
For advice on what is acceptable in this regard before posting, please contact OZmium management.

Promotion of 'get rich quick' schemes or e-mail solicitations to join such schemes.

Unpaid advertisements or spam.

Persistent irrelevant or off-topic postings such as political or religious rhetoric.

Persistent attacks on OZmium Pty Ltd designed to cause commercial harm.
In particular, attacks from anonymous posters concealing their identities behind generic (Yahoo, Hotmail, etc) e-mail addresses are not acceptable in view of the likelihood of them being competitors.

Postings not covered by any of the above, but deemed clearly inappropriate by management.

NOTE:
Management reserves the right to responsibly edit postings in line with the Terms of Use outlined above, for example to remove an obscene reference from an otherwise worthwhile posting, without justification or entering into correspondence.

Management also reserves the right to restrict or ban members who contravene these Terms of Use, create a nuisance or become difficult or vexatious, without justification or entering into correspondence.

[jfc]

Please note:

Posters are entitled to ask whether a betting method stacks up mathematically. People are entitled to disagree with a post and substantiate their position.

An inability to understand the maths of racing and handicapping, or a lack of interest in that area is fair enough.

But that does not give a poster the right here to accuse others who believe maths is important for understanding racing and handicapping of making a "personal slanging match" because they raise these issues. Nor is name calling acceptable.

Moderator.
<!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->


Once more I've trawled through this thread before presenting my considered contribution.

One clear offender throughout this is Chrome Prince. But rather than this regular being cautioned for his violation of the T&C he continues unhampered. Meanwhile some of those rightly challenging him have mysteriously vanished.

On repeated occasions he presented such edicts:



To make $50,000 per year on a $4,000 bank is impossible - fact.

...

The bank would never withstand it - mathematical fact.

...

I don't buy it - sorry.

...

- it doesn't add up.

.....

If you do the math properly it's obvious that he is the one ridiculing us




All this before TheEasyRun had an opportunity to mention what "it" actually was.

Where was the substantiation?

And when first Sahasastar, then I, presented alternate valid mathematical demonstrations how it can be done, he made no effort to learn from that and mend his ways.

There is no point in repeating the T&C when certain regulars are permitted to flaunt their disregard for them or any common decencies.

[Chrome Prince]

jfc, I have not breached terms and conditions by disagreeing with the mathematics.

Others did by namecalling etc.

Please show me where I breached the Terms and Conditions and I'll remove myself!

The EasyRun made wild claims regarding mathematics, it didn't matter how he selected his horses if the basics were missing.

If I were to post the same wild claims, I'd expect to be challenged as well.

I'd either explain myself or leave.

jfc, your demonstrations were nothing more than demonstrations and not applicable to the real world of punting where losing runs happen.

Whatever the case, the easyrun could easily have copped the challenge and made me look silly by proving me wrong.

He couldn't or chose not to.

I have no issue with someone coming up with a new angle or idea, but the maths don't add up, and I believe that his figures are totally unrealistic.

Others can decide for themselves.

[Enjoying Insanity]

It's incredibly difficult to make money on a straight win over prolonged period of time on a Tote due to their take.

Exotics are far more complex in the TAB take, as there are so many more combinations, and can offer the best value. Pkus the way I work out exotics is to find out which horses cannot win, rather than look for those that can. Especially attempting to discount favourites as many punters go

Favourite-Field-Field


Nearly snatched the Melbourne Cup biggy last year as I opposed Makybe Diva for winning and had On A Jeune, Xcellent, Lachlan River, Leica Falcon, you name it for the first two places. I know it didn't happen, but I had many reasons to take on Makybe Diva, it didn't pay off, but if it had I would be driving a Ferrari now. All for a $230 bet...

Value is the name of the game, especially on the tote, and from my experience the bigger the pool the more chance of finding value and the better chance of making a profit.

[jfc]

Chrome Prince,

After taking the trouble to review relevant material before replying I now find my completely innocuous posts have been removed!

They were essentially mathematically impeccable calculations on how many bets it would take to double or triple a Bank given Odds, Edge and #Bets parameters objectively derived from the verifiable Gold Specials.

And in particular they satisfied the question about losing runs. If you use the Kelly Criterion then you cope optimally with the dilemma of wealth growth versus losing runs.

And they were as applicable to the real world of punting as any hypothetical post of this nature could be.

[syllabus23]

Quote.

"All this before TheEasyRun had an opportunity to mention what "it" actually was"

TheEasyRun has had plenty of opportunity to state his case and still does.

He has had plenty of detractors with regard to this thread (including myself) but on the other hand there have been any number of supportive posts.

TheEasyRun has posted several rambling contributions to his thread but so far,other than some very odd claims has said very little.

I have no animosity whatever towards TheEasyRun,but this is a (reasonably) open forum and like every other member I have a right to challenge any statements that I choose.

OK EasyRun,,it's dead simple,,,Prove your detractors wrong.

No Staking Plan
No Each Way Betting.
No Exotics.
Jockeys,,unimportant.
Trainers,,unimportant
Barriers,,unimportant
Form,,unimportant.
etc etc etc.....

Its a simple challenge.Tell us the secrets of "Listing to the right"

[whitey]

shaun is on the money and i would say mark is too, but still interseted to hear more from ITS SOOOO EASY . LEAVE HIM ALONE

[Chrome Prince]

Assume for argument's sake that TheEasyRun is genuine and might actually have something of interest to contribute.

Why on earth would he want to continue now?

He has clearly been welcomed with prejudicial hostility which is obviously set to continue.

Not just from Chrome Prince.

Now apparently his crimes are "saying nothing new" and "saying very little". There are very few here and everywhere that could pass those tests.

And the so-called challenges are far bigger offences than anything he might be likely to say. But don't get me started...

This joint will continue to remain in its prolonged rut while antics like this prevail.

jfc,

Let's assume that TheEasyRun is genuine and has something to contribute, if it works and he believes in it, he has had more than enough opportunity to repond to any challenge.

He never reponded with anything of substance, just threw out all conventional maths, form, jockeys, trainers, barriers etc.
Then continued on in the same way without addressing one question put to him.

He just kept deflecting any debate by saying I'll move onto this topic next.

Prejudicial hostility?

Common sense.

If I came on here and said I'd picked every winner of every race over a month backing one horse, I'd expect to be challenged as well, because it's never been done and flies in the face of reality.

There are ways to achieve the sort of returns he was talking about, but certainly not in the way he was describing. (a la Mark and a few others).

To me, it all smacks of a huge wind up.

Since when is a challenge an offence?

Surely to come onto a public forum and post as if this is the way to do it, is not going to cop some flak when it's all wishy washy and doesn't add up.

Frankly, I know when someone's having a lend of me, I've been round the block enough.

When the maths don't add up I know that this "advice" is either made up or a wind up.

The antics you refer to keep the forum honest.

TheEasyRun is more than welcome to answer the questions put to him at any stage.

I don't see it happening anytime soon.

[crash]

[QUOTE=Chrome Prince]

1. If I came on here and said I'd picked every winner of every race over a month backing one horse, I'd expect to be challenged as well, because it's never been done and flies in the face of reality.

2.Since when is a challenge an offense?

3.The antics you refer to keep the forum honest.
QUOTE]


1. ....and where exactly did the easy run say that?

2. Since when the guy is a new member and came here just to explain how he punts and what he has found possible, not looking for challenge [which you threw down straight after his first post].

3. Those antics keep this forum empty of [possible ...we'll never know now] progressive thought and fresh ideas ....obviously feared by some.

[ubetido]

Hi all

I am sure that most here are intelligent and capable individuals and very astute.

However i feel when someone may want to express themselves we should all take on board this principle:

ONE NEVER STOPS LEARNING

If we start from there we may be more open to allow forumites to say what they feel based on there own experience is correct.

One can always offer a reason of a flaw or praise in the strategy or whatever from a mentoring angle rather than an attack.

Cheers
ubetido

[Mr. Logic]

Below is the thread that started all this. I was looking forward to see what TheEasyRun had to say ... you know, some light entertainment. If I treated it like that it would be OK, otherwise it could be seen as an affront to my intelligence. Why would TheEasyRun disappear? I'm not going to guess here, but I have a few views of my own.

I must admit I found the following went completely against common sense. It is LOGICALLY flawed AND WRONG. ***** to say "It simply cannot be done" is BLATANTLY FALSE.

"4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth. It simply cannot be done."

Hi guys.

This is not a post intending to upset anyone, as punting is a game full of memorable moments that I would never wish to take from anyone. It is however a small collection of what I have learnt in the game over the past twenty seven years, posted up to give food for thought to those who would like to take their punting activities to a higher plane......... those who would clearly like to punt horses for a living, or very close to it.

First up, a few basic misconceptions.

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!

2. It is a falacy that a massive turnover is needed to show profit over time.
This is for men who have that poor of a selection and staking method, that a very large turnover of money is needed to capitalize on a very skinny profit margin. In reality these type of punters last only as long as other money (or imagination) is proping it up.

3. It's quite false that a very high starting bank of $10,000 to $30,000 or more is needed to start a betting bank off. And false also is the thinking that the bank must be turned over and over like it was inside a washing machine.
The fact is a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!

Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.

4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.

Those are just a few misconceptions and there are of course plenty more, but I would rather go on to selection and staking methods, punting psychology, how to relax into a life on the punt, and why you should never except odds on any bet unless it can return you over $7 to the dollar.

I will post the rest up tommorow in Part 2, and then in Part 3 on Tuesday.

Happy Hunting
TheEasyRun

[syllabus23]

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!

Agreed Mr Logic, and what total **** the above statement is.This appeals to the "duh,yair, yair" brigade, but logic ?? lolololol.

[TheEasyRun]

Name one big money Professional Punter that makes his sole income on punting horses here in Australia. Just one. (sponging commission agents not accepted).
The only men that even come close are the boys in the States that turn over massive amounts on exotics, just to recoup a turnover bonus from the totes.
Their profit, funnily enough, averages out to the figure of the bonus. One bad year and their nervous, two in a row and their dead in the water.

The 'great' ***** did not make a betting fortune on the punt. He in fact lost all his money on the punt.
His selection and staking methods were seriously flawed. He only managed to survive with 66-1 shots carrying an increase in stakes. He did not last long. He was one of the great falacies of Australian punting.

[TheEasyRun]

Soon gentlemen..........soon

[Stix]

Name one big money Professional Punter that makes his sole income on punting horses here in Australia. Just one. (sponging commission agents not accepted).
The only men that even come close are the boys in the States that turn over massive amounts on exotics, just to recoup a turnover bonus from the totes.
Their profit, funnily enough, averages out to the figure of the bonus. One bad year and their nervous, two in a row and their dead in the water.

The 'great' ***** did not make a betting fortune on the punt. He in fact lost all his money on the punt.
His selection and staking methods were seriously flawed. He only managed to survive with 66-1 shots carrying an increase in stakes. He did not last long. He was one of the great falacies of Australian punting.Yeah...... stir that Pot..... you go T.E.R. !

Now.... I'll just sit back and watch... should be fun !

[syllabus23]

They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!

Prove that statement..

[La Mer]

Name one big money Professional Punter that makes his sole income on punting horses here in Australia. Just one. (sponging commission agents not accepted).
****

[syllabus23]

Name one big money Professional Punter that makes his sole income on punting horses here in Australia. Just one. (sponging commission agents not accepted).


*****

When you make a universal statement it only takes one exception to make that statement false.

[partypooper]

You gotta hand it to "Easy Run" he/she certainly knows how to put the cat amongst the pidgeons!!!

[TheEasyRun]

***** does not make his sole income by punting horses syllabus, and he never did in his life.

A ***** rich gambler like ******.

C'mon fellas.....ya gotta dig deeper than that.

============================================

Not knowing their validity or otherwise, we are unable to accept personal comments about clearly named and identified individuals..

[chika]

I have to admit I am disappointed that TheEasyRun has not followed up from the original post,and really none of us are the wiser of the idea.
The only thing I would like to comment on though is that it is impossible to turn a $4000 bank into $50,000 in a year,that is just so wrong.
If any of you out there know that you can get 1 unit profit everyday you bet then the world is your oyster, it is that simple.
If you want to bet main meetings only, forget it, you have to be prepared to totally commit yourself and bet just about every day ( full time not part ).
Lets say you want to have 2 days a week off, that gives us 5 days a week to punt 52 x 5 = 260 days.
So if our bet is $200 thats $52K for the year.
I don't care how you achieve it, win, place, AS LONG AS YOU CAN GET 1 UNIT PROFIT A DAY.

IF YOU CANNOT GET 1 UNIT PROFIT EVERYDAY YOU BET I SUGGEST YOU TAKE UP LOTTO.

[TheEasyRun]

chika...... you have no idea on what true Staking is all about. I've been doing just that for best part of two decades, and so have many others that are not blinded like yourself.

[Chrome Prince]

Well it's all over now!

Chika has no idea?

Mate until you answer a few questions sensibly, I think chika makes a great deal more sense.

[chika]

TheEasyRun,

Getting agro aren't you and I don't know why.
All I wrote was the way I bet, at least I've posted that much.
You started this thread with some claims and I and a lot of others were very interested, and I actually defended you, but now regret that as you have posted zilch, nothing, just crap with zero meaning for anyone here.
Just a load of waffle.
Post something that even resembles what you started this thread about.

I don't think you can.

[TheEasyRun]

Yes chika I got very agro when I saw that the posts by myself and others were edited by Admin.

Which may have led me to misunderstand this line you wrote:
"The only thing I would like to comment on though is that it is impossible to turn a $4000 bank into $50,000 in a year,that is just so wrong."

It was as far as I got when reading that post. I apologise mate.

[syllabus23]

How about just getting on with it.

[crash]

Well now he is back, lets all just kick-back and let the bloke finish. We have nothing to lose [except perhaps a few myths] and there are quite a few here who would like to read what the easyrun's point/method is before the end of the spring carnival !

[TheEasyRun]

" Unfortunently, what with the time constaints involved of finding $7 shots to tip to unsuspecting battlers, and standing at the mounting yard sticking pins in horses, it will take a few weeks to set it up.
Plus this is not yet the right time of year to have a full Punting Stable. "

You would have read this on a previous post syllabus, and like most of what I have written, it too has been ignored or misquoted or edited by the Admin.

The next three pages contains Selection and Staking in detail, it is actually already staring you lot in the face already, but I can see I will have to explain everything in detail then answer silly questions and misquotes.

It was to be posted up when the stable was nice and full, on the same morning as the first lot of bets were posted up pre-race and got under way.
Sometime after next weeks racing, with a couple of video study days after that.

You see....... proof must be given, and given till a $4,000 Starting Bank grew to an $8,000 hieght (the limit) and then on to $50,000 profit, which it would hit before next winter started.

But......I can see very clearly that I would be wasting my precious time, as I have come to the conclusion that most on this forum are the worst kind of mug punter there is.........the Educated Twit.

Happy Hunting
TheEasyRun

[crash]

Well finally, at the end of the trail ...a website sales pitch for members !!!

Good luck to you easyrun as we need more racing forums here in Oz., but I fear you are not long for this world [propunter] as a member.

[Chrome Prince]

A mish mash of rubbish which was purely a drive for advertising his own forum.

You guaranteed the owners of this site, that you had no commercial interest.

This "educated twit" saw it coming a long way from home, I picked it as a wind up from the start. Despite the flack I copped and the erroneous mathematics which some seem to defend, it was quite obvious that even the topic starter does not believe in his own maxims.

On the one hand he says that all the education in the world cannot make you a good punter, and calls anyone who disagrees with him educated twits.

The intelligent (not educated) punter would welcome debate and be able to address it in an intelligent manner.

The unintelligent punter would start getting agro and namecalling, because he has no solid base to stand on, other than using other people's sites for free advertising.

At the end of the day, this so called uneducated master of the game has enlightened nobody with anything.

He was never going to, it was obvious from the very beginning.

How is this master of the game going to make $52,000 per annum when "it's the wrong time of the year".

[syllabus23]

Abraham Lincoln Quotes (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/abrahamlin110340.html) <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=j>Abraham Lincoln You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[jfc]

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!


Agreed. Usually they started with big money and know how to handle it.
So, although they are now pro, started with a big bank behind them.


2. It is a falacy that a massive turnover is needed to show profit over time.
This is for men who have that poor of a selection and staking method, that a very large turnover of money is needed to capitalize on a very skinny profit margin. In reality these type of punters last only as long as other money (or imagination) is proping it up.


Agreed. In fact there are many different strategies to pro punting. Some have very high turnover (volume of bets), but the most common is very few targetted bets. It's very hard to have a high volume of bets in a negative market and come out in front. Exotic punters are the only real exception, but then they must have a massive bank behind them to endure the losses.


3. It's quite false that a very high starting bank of $10,000 to $30,000 or more is needed to start a betting bank off. And false also is the thinking that the bank must be turned over and over like it was inside a washing machine.
The fact is a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!


This is where I disagree to a certain extent. One can start small and build it up, but if one wants to start making a steady income to cover the bills etc, there's no way a $4,000 bank will cut the mustard to provide a liveable income. Even if one was lucky enough to get 20% POT per month, and it's not going to happen every month, that's only $800 per month utilizing the full $4,000, one bad month and bang! One must be able to cater for long runs of outs and that run depends on strike rate. I agree with your point on turnover in relation to straight out betting, exotics are a little different.


Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.


What sort of POT are you basing that on, I strongly disagree.


4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.


Are you saying an uneducated person stands a better chance or experience and research has more weight?


why you should never except odds on any bet unless it can return you over $7 to the dollar.


Again, strongly disagree. The weight of bias against longer prices means you have to be far better than the market suggests. Backing the shorter end of the market has less bias against the punter and is far easier to overcome.

Not picking on you, and a lot of what you have written is excellent, I just disagree with some points.
Look forward to your response and further parts to your article.

Picked it from the start?

Not from where I sit.

And if you did why did you with others provide all this "any publicity is good publicity" by fanning the flames?

If he was allowed to say his piece without disruption this would not have dragged out for so long.

[Chrome Prince]

jfc, I gave him his chance, I didn't want to "attack" him from the start, but obviously I picked the maths didn't add up and it all unfolded within his first couple of posts.


It would have dragged out, that was his intention.

I can't believe jfc, that you and others argued with me for not letting him have a decent go at explaining himself, then when it's all revealed to be bollocks, insinuate that I had no idea.

[crash]

Don't spoil it [your victory?] by 'crowing' chrome ..there is nothing uglier.

PS. The easyrun sure has a nice looking website/forum though. I'll be keeping a watch on that one.

[syllabus23]

Just go to the bathroom,get a washer,start wiping the egg off your faces.

[crash]

Win some lose some in this game.

'Don't moan too loudly when you lose one, or shriek like a banshee when you win one'
Can't remember who's maxim that was [used to be 'girl' not banshee, but girl is no longer politically correct]. Maybe it was Don Scotts? :-))

[Chrome Prince]

Don't spoil it [your victory?] by 'crowing' chrome ..there is nothing uglier.


No crowing crash.

I deserve to post what I did after the hammering I got from you and jfc over this whole debarcle.

There is nothing uglier than a man who cannot admit he got it wrong and still persist blindly even though the writing was always on the wall and the result is here for all to see.

As syllabus says...

[partypooper]

Well, I finally Fell of my seat asleep!!!!! but wasn't it exciting while it lasted????? hee hee!