Another system

[Mark]

I have a mate who swears by this system. He explained it to me months ago but I never followed it up. Feel free to rip it to shreds, why it can't/won't/can/will work. By whatever means he narrows fields down to 5-10 picks, his logic is that if you can't pick the quinella/trifecta in that many then you don't deserve to win. He then uses Friday's Courier Mail, (my guess is any paper will do)& crosses out any runner whose opening price is longer than the paper's price. This can narrow it down to 3-8 picks. He then boxes the rest for an outlay close to $100 eg 6 picks, for Q, 6x5 divided by 2 = 15, x 7 = $105. For Tri 6x5x4 = $120. Q x7 & tri x 1 . Outlay $225. His average outlay for Q's is $105 & Tri's $125. Reckons it works on Syd & Melb Saturday races. MR7 last week was a big result for him & the reason he got back to me. Apparently he got it down to 8 picks, 5 of which were chucked out on opening prices. Guess what he was left with, 1-4-12. Q paid $50.30 & tri $1319.30 (qld). He didn't say what he won, but should have had Q 33 times (quite probable) & Tri 17 times (unlikely, unless I see him getting around in a new car). What do others think?
Good Punting.

[Mark]

Good to see such a huge response. I did some study of my own on this theory that perhaps the statistics men & system creators could possibly use. Of Sydney Saturday races for the last 12 weeks, 79 out of 97 winners have opened shorter that their newspaper price, 81%. Even better is when there are 5 or less selections, 32 out of 35 or 91%. The breakdown is 5 picks, 9 from 9, 4 picks 16/19, 3 picks 6/6, & 2 picks 2/2. 19 Quinellas, 54%, & 9 trifectas, 26%. Saturdays results were SR1 5 picks, 1,3,4,7 & 10, 7/1 winner, Q $28 & Tri $180. SR2 4,7,9, & 10 11/8 winner.
Maybe leaving out those that open longer than their paper price could be an added filter. I will certainly be using it as a guide in what I do.
Good punting.

[hermes]

I'm not a multiples man, Mark, which is why I haven't added any thoughts on this. But I ran it by a mate who is a multiples better. He liked it. He'll give it a try and get back to me. He did say it was not dissimiliar to what he does already. Multiples is about eliminating runners; he has his own minisystems for eliminating them (mainly based on price fluctuations before jump, I think) but he thinks the idea you've posted is certainly worth a try.

Thanks for posting.

Hermes

looks good

[Fryingpan]

Mark and everyone,

For those who are wondering where to find those opening prices to compare with the paper and use the internet for betting here's a place to start

http://betthe.net/beta/Frames/racinginframe.htm

[partypooper]

g'day,

Very new to this but came across this post, and am very interested as , I've previously been led to believe that the ONLY way to win at racing is to aquire BETTER odds than the true odds, this idea seems to be the opposite, or have I misunderstood??

[cameron398]

Hey there Partypooper.

I hear what you are saying. My guess is that the usual rule applies to win/place betting. The rule outlined above (of deleting those horses which open at longer odds than newspaper odds) probably becomes applicable with trifectas and quinellas in the above examples. Simply put - trifectas and quinellas are usually good value anyway - if you can land one...

Hope this helps.

regards Cameron

[Mark]

I'm not saying that this is the be all of selection systems, nothing is fullproof, but it does weed out a lot of losers, especially those that are very short. A horse that is say 5/1 in the paper could open at 9/2 but still drift to 10/1.
As an example, Saturday's results were Sydney 6/8 opened shorter than the PP (paper price) & Melb also 6/8. Of course it's not much help when there are 14 runners & 12 of them open shorter, but looking at overall winners to runners % it can give you an edge. In Syd & Melb there were 163 runners for 16 winners, around 10%. Those that opened shorter there were 96 runners for 12 winners, 12.5%. Those that opened longer, 67 runners for 4 winners or 6%. It may seem a little but those little bits add up in the long run. I've just realised that included in the "shorter" openers are those that open at the same as the PP. Taking this group on their own gives you 19 runners for no winners, and makes the shorter openers 12 from 77, or 15.5%.
Now if you liked something that was 10/1 PP & it opened at 12/1, I would never say don't back it, but if you liked something that was 6/4 & it opened 7/4, I would be thinking twice about it. A quick look at Saturday shows that there were 19 runners PP at 3/1 or less. Of these 13 opened the same or longer, for 2 winners @ 6/4 & 4/1, a big loss.
As most would know I only bet on races where I can back them all, but I have incorporated the above info into what I do & increased my POT.
:grin: