OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums

wesmip1

21st January 2006, 06:35 PM

All,

I see a lot of systems every so often appearing on this forum for sale. Yes they do get cleaned up by management but I hope mine will stay around.

Here it is ... I will give you the rules for free on the condition you agree to think about giving me $1 after you make your first $100....

If you don't agree then don't read below ....remember you must "THINK" about about giving me that $1.

1. This works on any race with the first 5 horses having run at least 4 races each.
2. Which ever horse has the highest place % is our horse.
3. Bet on it for a place only if it is showing more than $1.99 ( ie $2 or higher).

Its very simple ... why be complex.

This works ... just look at todays results .... 9 races bet so far today and a return of just over 16%.

feather

21st January 2006, 07:08 PM

Well the "no brainer" is there for all to see. still going strong
today-
sr4-3 gypsy honour
br6-1 high academy
br8-1 startlactic

wesmip1

21st January 2006, 07:14 PM

feather,

I agree. No Brainer is a pretty good system too.

Has some nice results.

crash

21st January 2006, 10:07 PM

OK you guys [and any other beneficiaries], when are you going to send me that $1 for 'No Brainer'?

Like Dr. Ron said: "you could write a good system on the footpath outside of Ranwick and it wouldn't affect prices". The first run of outs and it's onto the next system :-)

captain charger

22nd January 2006, 12:22 PM

feather,

I agree. No Brainer is a pretty good system too.

Has some nice results.

Wes,have you tried it for a win.

crash

22nd January 2006, 01:19 PM

captain charger,

I originally wrote it as a win system [it works win or place]. I have done very well out of it over the years. For some reason though, it is not at it's best during the spring carnival [3 springs in a row]. I put the system up [deliberately] at the beginning of last spring. It started well but went a bit sour so it dropped out of the interest list.

I put it up to prove the point that a free system that works will not affect prices. I think I proved my point very well indeed.
I got a bit sick of reading that 'if anyone knew a good system that worked long term it would never be put up on a forum'. I think there have been quite a few over the years put up here that work fine long term. I'm not going to name them though. Punters should do their own leg-work.

DR RON

22nd January 2006, 02:23 PM

Like Dr. Ron said: "you could write a good system on the footpath outside of Ranwick and it wouldn't affect prices". The first run of outs and it's onto the next system :-)

Hi Crash, Ithink you have got us Doctors messed up. From memory it was our good buddy Dr Pangloss who quoted that one. :)

feather

22nd January 2006, 06:14 PM

Crash, i must admit at times this system gave me the (whatever word u want to use).
Since i was chopping and changing, cutting and pasting, I decided to go through the whole lot again starting from aug, (will be going through july papers soon)

Metro Tracks only
(min-max distance)

Aug 14r x 3w $24.50
Sep 10r x 4w $27.70
Oct 8r x 5w $22.20
Nov 14r x 4w $18.50
Dec 18r x 6w $23.40
Jan 8r x 6w $31.00

Non metro made a profit each month, but the Under $3 made a small loss in Nov. As you once said forget Perth,
Also interesting enough, over the 21 days, u do win some, but not enough to cover the losses. Also 58k+ a loss, I also kept the F&M races seperate from the above- 8r x 1w $9.30 (chilli cool)

Should mention i did forfeit quite a few good winners by using the newspaper and not the wa prices

crash

22nd January 2006, 07:01 PM

Hi Feather,

I thought the original system was as good as it would go. Under $3PP is waste of time. Filly's and Mares [together] races, ditto and above 57kg.
I also ruled out in the original all cups, stakes and group races and another little rule from the original was to ignore races with a very short priced PP fav. that is against a selection [they beat the selection too often].

I used the WA PP site because it uses a mechanical system for PP odds which has the advantage of consistency [not necessarily better, just more consistent]. I think your figures would have been better using that site.

Dr. Ron,

Dr. Pergolas ? Ah, I knew it was Doc. though, my mind hasn't completely gone yet:-)

Cheers.

feather

22nd January 2006, 07:33 PM

Crash, I have to agree with you regarding the wa site, In sept it created another 7r x 5w $28.60. But I wanted to be able to use the newspaper only, and it has been in profit The only cups that i by passed was if they were at the venue that it was racing in (mainly non metro).
But i would have to disagree with you regarding the short priced fav. (mainly non metro again)
This is what my newspaper results are Metro only.
I'm happy with it

crash

22nd January 2006, 10:54 PM

All that matters Feather is that you have been smart enough to utilize the system and applied it to your style. If one punter only has profited I have shared something worthwhile. Good on you mate.

crash

22nd January 2006, 10:56 PM

All that matters Feather is that you have been smart enough to utilize the system and applied it to your style. If one punter only has profited I have shared something worthwhile. Good on you mate [don't forget my $1 sometime :-) ]

Grub

9th February 2006, 06:47 PM

G'day

Just new to this forum, use Bet Selector to play around, have Metro data back to Jan 2002, hope can I offer something and learn heaps from some of you learned or seasoned campaignors....

Crash - I was interested to have a look at this little system of yours going forward (I can't go back as I don't keep f/guides). Do you mind if I clarify some of your original rules or ask feather what he is doing (as he is obviously pretty keen on the subject)

Grub

Grub

9th February 2006, 07:02 PM

How good am I going first up.

A quick search of old threads has done the trick, thats a 'no brainer'.

crash

9th February 2006, 07:26 PM

Grub,

Go with the original rules before I started to tweak them to improve 'Spring carnival' performance. In fact I should re-post the [complete] original rules as the rules I posted are only 'almost' original. Still a winner though as posted. In fact a VERY good winner for over 3yrs. now [and who said no one would ever post a winning system on this forum?].

Turned up some nice winners lately inc. a $12 win in SA metro a couple of weeks back.

The system is free, but I'll hold onto the intellectual property rights in case some mongrel tries to put it up as theirs for sale. I still use it off and on as a rest from handicapping.

Grub

9th February 2006, 09:13 PM

1. Sat. Metro Adl. Syd. Brisb. No Hurdles, Maidens or 2yr. old races.
2.Add placings last 4 starts. Total must be no more than 9 [0 or S =10] Ed: I use this rule in a lot of my systems as it guarantees decent form and fitness.
3. Last start must have been 21 days or less
4. Track no worse than dead.
5. Max weight 57kg after any apprentice allowances.
6. Morning line odds no more than $7 from:
How close is this to your original Crash?

KennyVictor

9th February 2006, 11:49 PM

The system is free, but I'll hold onto the intellectual property rights in case some mongrel tries to put it up as theirs for sale.I wish you luck.
My memory is a bit sketchy on this one but didn't someone have a system on here for a long time then suddenly it dissappeared because it was for sale somewhere. I'm not sure who the seller was nor which came first the thread or the system seller but I hope you've got your 'intellectual property' registered somewhere other than on a public forum.

KV

crash

10th February 2006, 06:24 AM

Kenny,
I've copied and stored the original thread from when I first posted it.

Grub,

Rules 1,2,4,5,7 are original [not put up as is]. For the first year, odds were open to $7PP. I changed that because the $7 runners weren't paying their way. The price rules control Class. $7 runners were [usually] up in class too much, although they get up now and then at up to SP $15.

I included cups, stakes and group races when I put the system up because it was the start of spring. I have a personal prejudice against these races and 1000m. events except as fun bets. I don't think they payed their way long term, but it was more interesting. They can be included if you like [there my prejudices only], but I ignore them as 5/1 the field races mostly as anything can get up, look what happened to Candy Vale. I also added Dead tracks.

.......................................NO BRAINER...............................................

1. All meetings [except WA] No Hurdles, Maidens, 2yr. old races, Cups,
... Stakes or Group races. No Fillies and Mares races [Mares only OK].
2. Distances 1100m to 2200m only.
3. Add placings last 4 starts. Total must be no more than 9 [X, 0 or S =10]
4. Last start must have been 18 days or less.
5. Good Track only
6. Max weight 57kg after any apprentice allowances.
7. PP odds $2.50 to $6.80 from: www.watabonline.com
8. If more than one contender, choose the lower odds and if odds the same, choose lower TAB No.

NOTE* Newspaper PP odds can also be used but stick to the same source.

Feather has refined these rules to suit himself and is doing OK I hear. God only knows what his rules are now. Good luck to him I say.

Cheers.

crash

10th February 2006, 07:00 AM

Rule 4 is an injury rule. If the runner is starting within 18 days, it usually means it pulled up well and uninjured from the previous start.

The 57kg. rule ...well check out how many runners win with 57.5kg and up, especially non-metro. Not enough to be profitable in this system.

Rule 6 is there because PP odds are mostly done for good tracks. Wet tracks throw the system out because the PP odds are then out of whack.

Why do I put the system up? Because I'm happy with my punting efforts [mostly handicapping] and I enjoy myself as a serious amateur. I'm not trying to make a fortune [too old to be of any use to me] or become a Pro. Punter which doesn't mean I lose or my POT on average is worse either. My turnover though is not in the Pro. bracket [meaning enough to live on]. I also believe punters flit from system to system at the first run of decent outs, so long term the odds are not going to be affected.

crash

10th February 2006, 07:56 AM

Grub,

Correct www address is below. From there save it to 'favorites' and register [free]. This is the page to go to once registered to log in and view PP odds. I like them because they are mechanical, not worked out by somebody. They are often put up a bit late [11am.] during the week. When you spot a selection, click on the runner and it's recent form, last start will come up and check it is within the 18 day rule [an easy rule to forget]. Cick on 'back' to return to the races.
This site is also a good place to check STAB results on the one page at the end of the day.

If you are having a good run with this system don't get carried away with bet amounts. After the first year that I used it, my bets were up to $300 a bet, then I hit a big bad patch of mostly outs ......ouch !!!

http://www.tabform.thewest.com.au/jspcontent/TFFrameset.jsp

KennyVictor

10th February 2006, 10:43 AM

Hi Crash,
I see a lot of people giving a lot of weight to PP odds. Explain to me if you will the logic behind basing bets on PP odds as opposed to say SP odds.

Cheers,
KV

crash

10th February 2006, 12:40 PM

Kenny,

The main difference for a system is you can put your bets on after knowing track condt. rather than being in front of the pc. [most people aren't in the position to do that or don't want to be] before each jump. Mechanically, PP is based on past performance ratings for a good track. The data boys hate them as they haven't the data base for PP mostly to do a 'past 5yrs.' check.

For today and tomorrow with odds from the Herald Sun but I use $2.50 to $7 as newspapers dont print PP's of $6.80 [most people would use a Newspaper] this is what the system has lined up [original rules as I have printed]:

Must be Good track to bet.

Friday; Walcha R4/6 Mafia don
Saturday:
Cheltenham: R5/11 Slinky Nandina
Rosehill: R1/1 Bye Bye Bella, R3/4 Palabiro, R7/10 Aqua D'amore
Doomben R1/1 Moving North, R6/6 Minassi, R7/1 Shysu

Check em' out. Nothing wrong with that line up !

crash

10th February 2006, 01:07 PM

Just noticed the Walcha bet is a Cups race. Scratch that as a bet. Interesting to see how it goes, but Cups are not generally good performers for this system.

feather

10th February 2006, 03:55 PM

Hi crash, and grub,
After 3 months of chopping and changing, adding and subtracting this system, I have ruled 2005 off and started afresh for 2006.
I agree with crash on a couple of things, well maybe one.
Cups – out, especially if it is the venues name as was Wakcha today.
Below are the rules that I know of that Crash first wrote about.

1. Sat. Metro Adl. Syd. Brisb. No Hurdles, Maidens or 2yr. old races.
2.Add placings last 4 starts. Total must be no more than 9 [0 or S =10] Ed: I use this rule in a lot of my systems as it guarantees decent form and fitness.
3. Last start must have been 21 days or less
4. Track no worse than dead.
5. Max weight 57kg after any apprentice allowances.
6. Morning line odds no more than $7 from:

I must admit I have never looked at track conditions. I also have changed rule five and rule six.
Been happy with the metro ones, I then looked at the non metro. Then I separated the provincial and country venues, and have a different rule for each.

Under $3.00 price - I made a profit Sept, Oct, Dec, and a loss Nov and January.. but I have found a rule that eliminates just about all bar a handle full - well left me with two for one win - january. Yesterday there was only one at rocky r2-3 morning glory. But i am about to put rocky into prov status.

So far this year
Metro Jan 16r x 9w $41.90
Metro Feb 10r x 4w $14.80

Prov 15r x 8w $50.80

Country 12r x 5w $21.30
(however applying the rule that I have for under $3.00, it would result in 4r x 2w $23.70) both paper price's were $6.50 & $5.50

I would be really interested in your findings Grub and what results you can find

Crash I did send you not one but two dollars, but it must of rolled down your beautifully manicured lawn into the lake there. maybe if you put on your scuba diving gear you maybe be able to find it :-)

Stix

10th February 2006, 04:55 PM

Would you buy a system with the following results?

WIN S/R 20.1% (Av. Price $6.16) 23% POT
PLC S/R 44.3% (Av. Price $2.43) 36.6% POT

EXACTA SYSTEM
EXA S/R 11.1% (Av. Price $27.46) 20.1% POT

TRIFECTA SYSTEM
TRI S/R 11.1% (Av. Price $270.72 based 40.6% of full divy) 21.7% POT

crash

10th February 2006, 05:36 PM

Grub

10th February 2006, 06:15 PM

Thanks Crash/feather,

I look forward to having a play as time permits.

feather,

Youre results for this year are pretty grand - might have to look into you disregarding track condition and see if that might be a deceptive edge there or perhaps look at including them if they have some wet track form. Anyway lots to think about. Thats what makes this whole thing enjoyable - die of boredom just following a set of rules (no matter how good they are) and not trying to analyse and improve.

Got to run and working tomorrow so I might post tomorrow evening what selections I had for SAT from original rules and see if you can set me on the right track.

Cheers

Grub

Stix

11th February 2006, 12:30 AM

Feather,

How do you know our 'perfectly manicured' lawn slopes down into the lake? Are you closer than I think? The Brake is getting into her scuba gear as we speak....

Did you have a good look at that Walcha Cup [wish I did]. Mafia Don ran 3rd. The bottom weight and best priced won at 20/1 [small field too] which just 'happened' to have Dale Spriggs on board and just 'happened' to have a very poor lead up to the race [to get the min. weight] and just 'happened' to have won the race last year !!! Feather I think you would have done a lot better if you had stuck to good tracks. Wet tracks stuff up the PP odds.

Stix,
I wouldn't buy any system [except this one of mine for a $1 and anything the management here is offering of course :-)]Not withstanding crash, your hatred of system sellers.... the statistics (although proven... but excluded for our arguments sake) would not appeal to you... ??

If it was free.... of course there would be plenty of takers, but not the thrust of my hypothisis......

Is there anyone that would consider parting with their "hard earned" on a system that worked !! ...... not over a specified period of time, but over any period you named.... within the last 10 years?....... me no speak &H^T http://www.propun.com.au/racing_forums/images/smilies/wink.gif

You can only do your best and offer.....

crash

11th February 2006, 08:36 AM

lomaca

11th February 2006, 09:00 AM

I had a good look today at all meetings from WA tabonline. For the original rules I came up with this lot below. Aqua D'amore was in a Stakes race, so I dropped that one [could easily win it]. Another I dropped was in a F&M race.

Cheltenham: R5/4 Chemin*

Rosehill: R1/1 Bye Bye Bella, R3/4 Palabiro

Doomben R1/1 Moving North, R3/1 Milady Clang,
R4/3 Lasting Luck*, R6/6 Minassi*

Hobart R2/3 Concurrent*

Stand outs*

Hi Crash!
I do not use your system rules, but in some races we are remarkably close with the selections.
Could it be, that by using (any) sensible selection criteria, the most likely horses to win or place in that race will come to the top? (at least ON paper, anyway!)

here are my selection for the same races

CHE race5: 4,1,8,6
ROS race1: 1,4,2,9
..... race3: 4,2,6,1
DOO race1: 11,6,10,2 /this is the only one we differ markedly
...... race3: 5,1,3,4
...... race4: 1,3,7,12
...... race6: 12.4.6,7
ELW race2: 1,3,2,9

crash

11th February 2006, 09:40 AM

Good luck with your selections Lomaca.

I had a good look today at all meetings from WA tabonline. For the original rules I came up with this lot below. Aqua D'amore was in a Stakes race, so I dropped that one [could easily win it]. Another I dropped was in a F&M race.

Cheltenham: R5/4 Chemin*

Rosehill: R1/1 Bye Bye Bella, R3/4 Palabiro

Doomben R1/1 Moving North, R3/1 Milady Clang,
R4/3 Lasting Luck, R6/6 Minassi*

Hobart R2/3 Concurrent*

Stand outs*

Take out Bye Bye Bella as its carrying 1/2kg. too much for the rules. It's going to get beat by No. 2 Prima Nocle anyway I think.

Interesting to note in Sydney R4/10 Magnus is running it's 2nd. only start. First start it beat Californian Dane 8-)

I'm only puting these selections up today to see how the system's original rules go. Dosn't mean anything long term but what the hell. I won't be putting any more selections up. I don't mind if the thread quietly slips of the page after todays meeting :-)

La Mer

11th February 2006, 03:15 PM

I had a good look today at all meetings from WA tabonline. For the original rules I came up with this lot below. Aqua D'amore was in a Stakes race, so I dropped that one [could easily win it]. Another I dropped was in a F&M race.

Cheltenham: R5/4 Chemin*
Rosehill: R1/1 Bye Bye Bella, R3/4 Palabiro
Doomben R1/1 Moving North, R3/1 Milady Clang,
R4/3 Lasting Luck*, R6/6 Minassi*
Hobart R2/3 Concurrent*

Applying the IAS openers to the rules, these would be the following qualifiers today:

Sydney 3) Mi Casa
Brisbane 3) Sir Sensible & Milady Clang
Brisbane 4) Lasting Luck
Brisbane 6) Minassi
Adelaide 5) Chemin

Don't think Sydney race 1 was a qualfier as it was fillies & mares.

crash

11th February 2006, 05:12 PM

Interesting angle La mer.
I crossed out the Syd. R1 F@M race [it came 3rd. and definitely had too much weight awarded to it. Up 4kg.].

Interestingly, Magnus, the horse that beat the Dane I mentioned, won. An easy collect there.

Not a good day for the system. Milady Clang w$4.30 and a couple of place getters. I don't mind as the thread will now slip quietly off the page [I hope] from lack of interest.

Grub

11th February 2006, 08:38 PM

You might get your wish Crash. I just learnt the hard way that this forum software doesn't like you pasting stuff from a word document. A touch frustrating....

On today, I did get Babinda Half BR6n12 as a selection above Minassi due to lower PP which helped todays return. Depends where you get the PP prices.

Big plus so far with NB is it doesn't take a long time to come up with selections particularly as I can get a short list by running some criteria through Bet Selector. That is a reason I have stopped handicapping/form study to a degree - just takes time to do it right.

feather,

How'd you end up today. I did want to ask you what your opinion is when there are 2 selections as there was in 3 races today. One 'lowest PP' got up and one higher PP got up. I do favour the idea of higher PP but perhaps that is just greed and lower PP's get up more often. Have you found any trend in that area?

I did do you a message with the selections I got from the original rules today plus a little side issue I'm looking at that came up with one more slection today but as i stated above it wouldn't let me post it because I cut and pasted. I'll touch on it later if youre interested and I'll start keeping some records.

Grub

feather

11th February 2006, 09:13 PM

Hi Grub,
think its best for me to keep my opinions to myself from now on, i had four selectons today, and two were different to what was written here.
but keen to keep in touch on this matter.

Grub

11th February 2006, 09:57 PM

Just on that is there private messaging on this forum. I am not having any joy trying to send you a message - comes with 'has been disabled etc'

Not wanting to stalk you feather but am happy to discuss things 'off air' if you wish.

Grub

crash

12th February 2006, 06:58 AM

Your right about this being a very easy system to use Grub. My wife has just started betting the system for this year. Sticking with the original rules and one I forgot to mention [ an unwritten rule I added at some stage]: If a selection is in a race with a fav. at $2.50 or less, ignore the race [too often the short Fav. starts odds-on and wins, especially during the week]. We are familiar with these rules and they have [mostly] been kind to us.

I'm sure feather mentioned once that if more than one selection comes up he dumps the race. Was it a win or loss for your system version selections yesterday Feather?

I'm still handicapping but it's been a tough summer with the wacky hot/humid weather earlier on not helping. If it hadn't been for a [lucky] 30/1 shot the Brake pulled at a provincial last week and a 12/1 shot I fluked yesterday, we would be in the red so far this year. So no great performances here.

Grub

12th February 2006, 11:39 AM

Crash,

I agree with that rule (race with short priced fav), it has some logic. In fact that is what I like about NB thus far is that there is good logic behind the criteria - one supports or clarifies the other so it doesn't (to me) have the same feel as a mechanical system. It's early days for me but it appears there should almost never be the case when you are backing a horse that you think has no conceivable chance of winning todays race. I am also attracted to the use of PP prices rather than SP as it allows some market influence but you don't need to be stuck to computer on race days. Makes home life much happier - Happy wife (or brake as you like), Happy kids - Happy days)

(backing a horse that you think has no conceivable chance) is why, despite spending a few years playing with them, I am off pure mechanicl systems in particular long shot systems that rely on an occasional fluke.

Just on that subject I don't think there is anything to worry about someone selling this system/method/concept because the only ones they plug and they only ones us silly buggers buy is those with totally unbelievable and unacheiveble longterm results - like 180% POT. Open up with 35% SR and 15% POT for last 10 years and it just won't have that same 'This is the one' tone in Ian Craig or Brain Martyns voice. I know many of us on this forum would like the sound of it but it doesn't rope in the sales (and probably doesn't exist).

I have noticed some mention of $3PP, is this to eliminate if the PP is under $3? Just that yesterday it would have eliminated Palibiro and Sir Sensible (both beaten fav's) from my selections and left me with Mlady Clang and Mi casa in the same races which gave a better result.

Grub

crash

12th February 2006, 03:46 PM

Grub,

The rules of NB where all linked to produce a sensible handicapping result. Every selection must have a chance, a runner I would consider backing after handicapping the race and within reason this has been achieved. I think a big problem with many systems is they are designed by very poor handicappers with little understanding of it, through lack of interest and not much practice because of that. The system then throws up a lot of selections that a handicapper wouldn't back in a pink fit.

You could use $3/$7 as your price for most newspapers etc. But I think $2.50/$6.80 is a good one for the WA site. For the Newspaper if there is a $2.50 or less PP fav. I don't back a selection running against it. For the WA site I use $2.40 because the site has those sort of odds. Newspapers tend to round to 50c.

There is a starter today at $2.50PP. Might ease out up to $5, or shorten. That one is heading to wards odds-on. I don't worry too much as it evens out. Another runner today is $6.80PP and running against a $2,50 PP fav form the WA site. $2.40PP and I would have ruled out the selection. Small differences but put in place over time.

You really need to work with what suits you, but be careful of worse than dead tracks and PP odds. Also worth considering is the formline that adds to 9 for most selections didn't come from slow or heavy tracks and thats the Handicapper thinking here and saying system logic becomes rickety and unsupported by inclusion of wet tracks, unless the selections are then handicapped for the cond't. and that is drifting from the whole point of a stand alone system.
Everything must be supported by everything else in the system. I stick to 'good' tracks and less bets in poor weather. Of course, how individual punters use or modify the system is up to them. They might improve it or vis-a-vis too.