Four for the Pool Room

[Barny]

TWOBETS- “When backfitting systems it is impossible (almost then) to isolate aparticular input factor. You may think you are adding only "first up laststart" runners for example. But in fact within that group you have amillion other factors that may or may not be having an input on the result.Thus when you add or subtract any single input it actually affects the otherinput factors.....There, clear as a bell".

Wesmip1 - "The fewer but more complex filters, which are not easilyidentifiable by most punters, in a system, the more chance of it repeating.

AngryPixie– “There's dozens and dozens, even hundreds of potential variables you could measure, most of which aren't independant so in using them you're in fact doubling up on your measurements.”

Barny– “You’re paying a fairly hefty premium in terms of SP for the most popular filters /combination of filters – look where no-one else is looking”<o:p></o<img>>

[Barny]

I included myself because ..... I can (it's my post !!!)

[Star]

When I first joined this forum their were quite a few long timers, a few years on most are still here but a few seem to have disappeared. I wonder why and where they might be now.

eg. Crash
Baghwan
Wesmip

I know their are more because I enjoyed the banter.

ps. Sorry, I meant to start a new thread, not hijack this one. Only 5 mts to play with.

[TWOBETS]

Wesmip1 - "The fewer but more complex filters, which are not easilyidentifiable by most punters, in a system, the more chance of it repeating.

Evenin' Barny,
Haven't had a rant for a while cause this forum makes me want to pull my hair out. Not that I've got any left.

This from Wesmip is the gist of my success and I wanted to add something that I perceive as fundamental but many on here obviously don't agree with.
All this talk about very specific yet obvious facts ( like placed last start, ridden by top jockey, or whatever.... these have all been factored in to the price and have thus been rendered useless to the average punter. The price will always be against you.

To my mind you have to look for the magic Wesmip filters for a nice edge in this game. I've only got one which is why I come across like a tight rrrs, and have nothing to share, but that's where I'm at.

[norisk]

All this talk about very specific yet obvious facts ( like placed last start, ridden by top jockey, or whatever.... these have all been factored in to the price and have thus been rendered useless to the average punter. The price will always be against you.


Five for the Pool Room, methinks.

But Barmy, tsk tsk,

http://www.quotespicture.org/quotes/humility-quotes-1.jpg

[Vortech]

Barny Read up on William Benter.

Identified around 140 variables that could affect a race result. 24% POT at around a net value of $50 Million.

when wesmip talked about filters he would often identify 2 sets of ratings, the use of a wide barrier and Days last start. The ratings were very unique but in the background many other variables gave him this total.

If someone were to say use the top rater from Don Scott racing and sports and the unitab top rater and sky ratings you probably are doubling your points or allocation on one particular variable.

[Barny]

I suspect you need some serious life experiences in the examination of the punting caper to appreciate how pertinent the insights of TWOBETS, wesmip1 and AngryPixie are .....

[Vortech]

My post was indicating that its not the specific amount of variables that is the key but more around which are not independent of each other.

Its not a matter of not appreciating there comments it comes down to doing your own testing and understanding how the results / ratings are produced.

I'm sure I'll be making adjustments for the next 10 years or so but at least I'll know whats in the background.

[darkydog2002]

Very true Vortech,

Good rating sites like inracing ,r+s are always refining their handicapping procedures as new inovations are discovered though they also recognize the value of the basics.
Cheers
darky

[Barny]

My post was indicating that its not the specific amount of variables that is the key but more around which are not independent of each other.

Its not a matter of not appreciating there comments it comes down to doing your own testing and understanding how the results / ratings are produced.

I'm sure I'll be making adjustments for the next 10 years or so but at least I'll know whats in the background.
So Vortech, if I've got your message clearly, your saying we need to identify variables that are clearly DEPENDANT, a bit like Rules, and Sub-Sets of Rules etc, all intemimgled with each other ?? That flies in the face of "going against the crowd".

[Vortech]

So Vortech, if I've got your message clearly, your saying we need to identify variables that are clearly DEPENDANT, a bit like Rules, and Sub-Sets of Rules etc, all intemimgled with each other ?? That flies in the face of "going against the crowd".It depends on the context in one uses the variables. An independent variables maybe a predictor variables or a controlled variable maybe even an maniupluated variable or exposure valiable.

I'm starting my base around bet selector base ratings and then incorporating weight ratings, class ratings, and speed ratings.

If this is "going against the crowd" then yes I am.

I don't understand the point you are trying to raise here?
I have clearly identified and stated I'm testing my ratings system here so I'm not saying it will work or not work. I am telling everyone my theory behind the rules and open for suggestions. Instead you tell me I'm going against the crowd.

Sorry maybe I should pay more attention to backing horses on a Sunday called "Frisky No More" or even more stating Unleashing the Vortech Beast!!

[Barny]

It depends on the context in one uses the variables. An independent variables maybe a predictor variables or a controlled variable maybe even an maniupluated variable or exposure valiable.

For the life of me I cannot understand what it is you're trying to communicate. I'm desperately interested because it's an area I'm close to getting to my ideal situation, and have a keen interest in !!!

[Barny]

Would you give examples of what you're referring to please ?

Predictor Variable, Controlled Variable, Manipulated Variable & Exposure Variable

[AngryPixie]

Would you give examples of what you're referring to please ?

Predictor Variable, Controlled Variable, Manipulated Variable & Exposure Variable

Barny, I believe they are different names for what are essentially independant variables. Depends on the science or discipline (Vortech's context I think).

In a nutshell, a dependant variable is derived from one or more independant variables. In a racing context the independant variables barrier draw, days since last start, track condition etc. combine to make the dependant variable, finishing position.

[Barny]

Thanks, almost getting too scientific for me.

It never ends does it ?

[Star]

Thanks, almost getting too scientific for me.

It never ends does it ?
You guys are out of my league, I might have to put Frisky in my Black Book. This forum is really heavy going.

But full marks to Vortech, Maythehorsebewithyou.

Star

[Shaun]

AngryPixie– “There's dozens and dozens, even hundreds of potential variables you could measure, most of which aren't independant so in using them you're in fact doubling up on your measurements.”

I agree with this 100% and this is the reason i say if you have any more than 12 filters in your ratings you are wasting your time unless these filters are totally different from each other.

The main problem is deciding what filters contradict each other, most people use the main filters but as mentioned the unitab ratings takes in to account some of these filters as does price because this has been assessed using similar filters.

The real difference is the way we asses say the last run how important do you regard the beaten margin and is it more important than the beaten margin of the run before that.

The same can be said about the other filters you use, some put a lot of importance in prize money won in the last 12 months where others will use a lifetime avg or maybe a race avg.

this is what makes your ratings different from others because with the amount and ease of access to information these days it is hard to find a new filter that has not already been used.

I like to use PPP and unitab ratings as a guide, it tells me that the rating i have given a runner is reasonably accurate as the best guide to a horses chances is it's price.

[Barny]

You guys are out of my league, I might have to put Frisky in my Black Book. This forum is really heavy going.

But full marks to Vortech, Maythehorsebewithyou.

Star
Star, if you can understand what Vortech was saying them you're much better than me old chum !!!

[Vortech]

The best place to start reading is from the first page of this forum.
Takes nearly a year to read it all but you'll learn everything you need to know.

Ratings as I understood came about from Don Scott who one day was on his way to church and got on the wrong line. Ended up at the track.
From there he built a passion for the races and developed a method to measure horses that were winning in lower grades vs horses in other grades.

A little like Greater Western Sydney in the AFL playing the coming second last playing a top side in the VFL.

Further from that others have developed more ratings systems based on different variables.

Class ratings use variables to determine the best class horse in a certain race
Weight ratings like the ZipForm from the sportsman develop the horses with the measure of how the horse's weight compares to its current official rating.

And so on and so on.

Other ratings like newspapers and unitab I assume take all of these figures into consideration and develop one rating.

Barny by using your database you should run the entire database if your PC can handle it and start filtering your results into categories.
Do a search on William Benter and how he developed his variables.
Sometimes its easier to focus on one track.
I'm considering basing new rules and variable points around different venues/distances.

Good luck

[Barny]

The best place to start reading is from the first page of this forum. Takes nearly a year to read it all but you'll learn everything you need to know.


To Star, it's EXACTLY what I've suggested in MANY of MY posts, I've actually done it ..... an enjoyable pursuit and you'll learn heaps. This site is brilliant for information, but you have to read, sort, catalogue, and keep many posts.

It's simply brilliant.

If you're not up to the task, then you're not up to exploring the vagaries of the punt, and IMHO you're destined to be a losing punter. Like anything in life .....

"The harder you work the luuckier you get" ..... Gary Player

No-one can explain it in one post .....

[beton]

The greatest factor that is not in any rating is " how is the horse today?" Sunday week ago I was told Bombora was So-So, Wednesday I was told the horse was getting there, Saturday morning I was told that the trainer had cancelled plans for Sunday. The trainer and the owners knew early Saturday that nothing would beat him. This was well before he was even ready to go to the track.

[Shaun]

Point being you can't win them all but have to trust in what you do.

Morphettville Race 8 MANGANESE, before the race i knew nothing about this horse only what i have read, my top 2 selections for the race.

4 Jeunealistic 3.48
5 Manganese 3.48
Results



1st 5 MANGANESE $29.00 $7.50
2nd 8 KERT $2.80
3rd 7 HANDSOME AS $2.00


I can explain why my ratings had this horse rated so high but can't explain why it was so high priced.

3rd best average price.
Not in top 5 for win & Place percentage
Best at the track and distance.
Best in the wet.
2nd for fitness.
2nd for class rating.
Not in top 5 for form
Not in top 5 for Qtab.
Not in top 5 PPP

[moeee]

Morphettville Race 8 MANGANESE, before the race i knew nothing about this horse only what i have read, my top 2 selections for the race.

4 Jeunealistic 3.48
5 Manganese 3.48

Results
1st 5 MANGANESE $29.00 $7.50
2nd 8 KERT $2.80
3rd 7 HANDSOME AS $2.00

I can't explain why it was so high priced.

Not in top 5 for form

"Not in top 5 for form" - That would pretty much do it!!

[Star]

"Not in top 5 for form" - That would pretty much do it!!Sometimes I feel it disrespectful to the person who I am asking a question of. Sometimes what is said might appear to be against what the general theme of what quite a few long termers here who know the ropes and have more then likely seen it all.

With repect to the Shaun and the horse Manganese. Shaun had it rated second, yet the market did not agree.

Here is my Conundrum No 64. Somebody else said if they price a horse or their ratings do and the market has it well over those odds that he believes the Market is nearly always right. So he accepts that and believes he is at fault not the market. ( or something similar, meaning the same if I have it right )

Now, this interests me greatly because I suppose one common theme through all my meanderings is looking for value, looking for the angle that the crowd and market undervalue.

So, in respect to Shaun. What should he have done in this situation. I have conflicting opinions given to me. One, disregard and let the market guide as a filter or 2. Go with what you have got. If your ratings or system selects something, and you think you have a sound policy then go with it, you can not deviate and not bet, because of factors outside of what you have judged the race on.

?

Star

[Vortech]

Shawn are you still using the following variables in your ratings

API
Win%
Place%
Distance/Track
Track Condition
Fitness
Class
Form
Qtab Rating

I think after hours of testing you guys are right all along. :(
I was wondering if you factor in Trainer / Jockey, WEight and Speed?

Regards

[moeee]

Here is my Conundrum No 64. Somebody else said if they price a horse or their ratings do and the market has it well over those odds that he believes the Market is nearly always right. So he accepts that and believes he is at fault not the market. ( or something similar, meaning the same if I have it right )

I believe the important criteria was that the above conditions only apply to a certain subset of races - Those being , the few races that the member finds playable.
And in the members case , I think he is trying to remove the unknown factor from his races as much as is possible.
The unknown in these seeming Overlay situations are that there must be something wrong with the horse in todays event because it is simply much too generous Odds and BookMakers , as we all know , are not a charity.

[Lord Greystoke]

So, in respect to Shaun. What should he have done in this situation. I have conflicting opinions given to me. One, disregard and let the market guide as a filter or 2. Go with what you have got. If your ratings or system selects something, and you think you have a sound policy then go with it, you can not deviate and not bet, because of factors outside of what you have judged the race on.

?

Star

My 2 roubles on this...

Rule no 1
Form an opinion of your own because,
Without one, we are nothing,
As punters (or men?)

Rule no 2
Seek all the advice/info/filters you can get
But at the end of the day.
Be prepared to back your own judgement!

LG

[garyf]

I believe the important criteria was that the above conditions only apply to a certain subset of races - Those being , the few races that the member finds playable.
And in the members case , I think he is trying to remove the unknown factor from his races as much as is possible.
The unknown in these seeming Overlay situations are that there must be something wrong with the horse in todays event because it is simply much too generous Odds and BookMakers , as we all know , are not a charity.
Hi Mo.

Agree 100% with your post.

Cheers.

[Star]

I believe the important criteria was that the above conditions only apply to a certain subset of races - Those being , the few races that the member finds playable.
And in the members case , I think he is trying to remove the unknown factor from his races as much as is possible.
The unknown in these seeming Overlay situations are that there must be something wrong with the horse in todays event because it is simply much too generous Odds and BookMakers , as we all know , are not a charity.True, Bookies are not charities. But I think that statement becomes blurred when they are now Tote watches, The Corporates certainly are and if they follow the Tabs who definately are market driven less their take then they fall in line.

Top Fluctuations and SP are so close in all races that tells me the market defines and it is the weight of money that decides.

Now, this brings up another interesting question. Where does the bulk of the money come from. Is it a few professional syndicates, or is it the sheer number of small punters or is it from something more sinister like ( Laundered Money ) I do no know , had to throw that in.

But, if we had some idea of the money trail and its connections then that might be something to factor in or to eliminate.

Maybe it is posssible to try to pick which races are of interest to this ( Money ) and either follow or avoid.

?

Star

[garyf]

Sometimes I feel it disrespectful to the person who I am asking a question of. Sometimes what is said might appear to be against what the general theme of what quite a few long termers here who know the ropes and have more then likely seen it all.

With repect to the Shaun and the horse Manganese. Shaun had it rated second, yet the market did not agree.

Here is my Conundrum No 64. Somebody else said if they price a horse or their ratings do and the market has it well over those odds that he believes the Market is nearly always right. So he accepts that and believes he is at fault not the market. ( or something similar, meaning the same if I have it right )

Now, this interests me greatly because I suppose one common theme through all my meanderings is looking for value, looking for the angle that the crowd and market undervalue.

So, in respect to Shaun. What should he have done in this situation. I have conflicting opinions given to me. One, disregard and let the market guide as a filter or 2. Go with what you have got. If your ratings or system selects something, and you think you have a sound policy then go with it, you can not deviate and not bet, because of factors outside of what you have judged the race on.

?

StarShaun would be able to answer this based on his methodology.
1- Is it profitable to bet horses that are way over his rated odds.
2- Is it not profitable to bet horses that are way over his rated odds.

With mine occasionally circumstances happen that a horse marked,
At say $5.0 will win at $21.0 etc.

"LONG TERM FOR ME BACKING HORSES OUTSIDE THE MARKET,
iS UNPROFITABLE SO AFTER THE CURSING AND SWEARING,
i GET BACK TO THE JOB AT HAND BASED ON 1,000S AND 1,000S,
OF PREVIOUS RESULTS".

Shauns ratings may find the bigger the better.
Everybody uses different ideas to how they arrive at and bet,
Their particular selections.

You can't put it into A OR B it's what method is "PROFITABLE",
For the selections you are betting.

Cheers.

[moeee]

Bookies are now Tote watches, The Corporates certainly are

Are they?
I didn't realize that.
In fact , i assumed that they were amongst the major players of the tote pools.
But I have not been to a Racetrack for over 10 years now , so things sure have changed.

[norisk]

Unless I am missing something, the exact thing one should be looking for with their ratings is the situation where, for example, our rated $5.0 chance is actually paying double, triple or more.

I really don't get spending the time & effort producing a set of ratings which all but mirror what the market believes is the true chances for each runner - I mean why bother, this has already been done for you, & IMHO will not be successful longterm.

[evajb001]

norisk, thats essentially how i'm using my ratings now.

I use my ratings in two ways:

One way is to bet every race that completes ratings on, using 3 of my top 5 ratings and tilting towards value - this is a more stable and consistent method.

Second is to bet only selective races and where there is significant value in my top rated horse - this is a more volatile but highly profitable (so far) method.

I definitely wouldn't even bother with putting the time and effort into my ratings if it wasn't giving me some kind of value-edge compared to what the market is already perceiving.

[AngryPixie]

Unless I am missing something, the exact thing one should be looking for with their ratings is the situation where, for example, our rated $5.0 chance is actually paying double, triple or more.

Norisk, while I agree the situation you describe above is the ideal, I doubt many of us - me included - price their rated selections with any great degree of accuracy at all. The days of the massive overs left us in the 90's and these days with cheap high speed computing available to all, once hard to come by information now much easier to come by, and the influx of international money into the local markets, the market is extremely accurate.

Variance will of course throw us outliers like Manganese but as garyf suggests we'd go broke if we just concentrated on these.

[norisk]

Agree somewhat AP however strike rates for price brackets remain fairly static, & I when I see suggestions to ignore runners because they appear overvalued, I shake my head, defeats the whole purpose.

My ratings are far from perfect but they throw up good priced winners on a regular basis for long enough now to know it's not a fluke or statistical anomaly or the like & thanks to BF good overs are still available.

[Shaun]

The additional factor i use are PPP i found this to help when the ratings had a couple runners with close scores.

In the end the best option for me is to stick with my percentages, no matter what the prices i still have better results for the top 3 selections than i would for say 4th to 6th selections.

Yes i get it wrong at times and the top selection at higher prices lose and lower selections at better prices do win, but in the long run my top 3 selection average over 50% winners with the top selection at around the 20% to 30% winners.

Since this is on par with most ratings services i am happy to stick with that, but as always the better class and form races produce the best results long term because i feel that most horses are trying to win these races.

If the best class race on the day is an Open then unless the trainer is just running to get his horse fit he would be trying to win.

This is where better prices can come from because people think that a particular horse is not able to win when that horse is trained to win that race.

[garyf]

Unless I am missing something, the exact thing one should be looking for with their ratings is the situation where, for example, our rated $5.0 chance is actually paying double, triple or more.

I really don't get spending the time & effort producing a set of ratings which all but mirror what the market believes is the true chances for each runner - I mean why bother, this has already been done for you, & IMHO will not be successful longterm.UH OH???.

Based on this the last 5 years for me betting full time has only been,
A fluke so obviously i need to log on to the "seek job site" and get,
Me a 9-5 job quick smart before the money runs out.

Cheers.

[norisk]

Not sure what that little hissy fits about - just giving my opinion...

[garyf]

Exactly what i am doing.

[moeee]

Based on this the last 5 years for me betting full time has only been,
A fluke
Yes you have posted a lot of times GaryF.
And no I haven't read all your posts as deeply and as thoroughly as I perhaps should have.
But I was under the impression that you do not rate horses yourself , but in fact purchase ready made Ratings by Others.
If wrong , my bad , if not , then what you are doing and what many others are doing is apples and oranges.

[garyf]

Almost there MO.

I download ratings from a.a.p megaform which,
Identifies the main 4-5 chances in a race using weight ratings.

I then do my own form, statistics, videos, etc,
To re-rate them throw some out completely,
But never bring in horses outside of 5.0 kg of the top rated.

I then set my own prices, and bet accordingly on certain,
Races in certain states on whatever i have left over.

Cheers.

[darkydog2002]

Do your filtered results differ substantially from their original ratings.
I,m very prone to use inracing ratings as a odd on to r+s.
Cheers

[Star]

Are they?
I didn't realize that.
In fact , i assumed that they were amongst the major players of the tote pools.
But I have not been to a Racetrack for over 10 years now , so things sure have changed.
Moeee.

I could not let that one go through to the keeper. One thing you have to realise that when I make a post or a reply, it is not necessarily coming from a great deal of knowledge.

However, I could say it is general knowledge, but, because I do not have the necessary quote or report to say that I am correct, I will not.

Let just say I assumed that the day of the big battles between bookie and punter might be close to over. To me, bookies are just glorified accountants.

Maybe you can explain what you mean when you say they are the major players of the tote pools.

To me that means laying off the over bet, so bringing all horses into their expected margin range. Balancing the books was an old term used for this. To me, that does not tell me that they can shape the market, they might just be the middle man, holding on to what they want and getting rid of the balance onto the TAB.

In my opinion, they cannot play the margins because they give Best tote on most if not all races, at least the major players do.

Star

[moeee]

Moeee.
Maybe you can explain what you mean when you say they are the major players of the tote pools.

I only wager and observe the small greyhound Pools , and there are some remarkable and Huge Wagers that take place in the last seconds before the close of betting.
Monitoring the pools often gives the impression that SOMEONE is getting on after the jump.

If the Bookies aren't doing it , then who?

[Star]

I only wager and observe the small greyhound Pools , and there are some remarkable and Huge Wagers that take place in the last seconds before the close of betting.
Monitoring the pools often gives the impression that SOMEONE is getting on after the jump.

If the Bookies aren't doing it , then who?
Ok. I think I can now see where you may be coming from. ( maybe )

I do not think you can bring greyhound pools into the equation of the bookies being the major players if you accept my view that they are only the middle men.

I understand greyhounds a little bit being involved with them on and off for a long time. I have owned a few , about six and my best was a Group 3 winner and top grade at Albion Park.

I have this feeling that over the last ten years the sport has gone back to its old ways. The punter is gone except for a few stalwarts and some guys who stand on a stand with a satchell around their necks who call themselves bookies.

It is well known that the money goes on in the last few minutes. The pools are so small that if the owner, trainer and connections want a bet they cannot get set with the majority of bookies, they have to go tote.

They cannot afford to give too much of a leg up to the public hence the money goes on as late as possible,

I have said also that in quite a few cases the price at the jump is not the same at the finish. But this is another story that deviates a little from the original point that bookies are major tote players.

Star

[woof43]

Barny Read up on William Benter.

Identified around 140 variables that could affect a race result. 24% POT at around a net value of $50 Million.

when wesmip talked about filters he would often identify 2 sets of ratings, the use of a wide barrier and Days last start. The ratings were very unique but in the background many other variables gave him this total.


If your trying to find winners for every race that goes around, you do indeed, need to account for over 140 variables, but as Wesmip stated identfying a couple of variables, when combined produces a super variable but this will only let you win on a certain subset of races. This is akin to a broken down handicapping system

To help us find all the winners, groups like Benter turned their attention to geo-science and two theory's namely Inverse Theory and Forward Theory for the answers

[Vortech]

I've found myself with so much data and not knowning what to do with it all.

Is there any good sources of reading material around the two theories?

[rails run]

I only wager and observe the small greyhound Pools , and there are some remarkable and Huge Wagers that take place in the last seconds before the close of betting.
Monitoring the pools often gives the impression that SOMEONE is getting on after the jump.

If the Bookies aren't doing it , then who?
Hi moeee
The 'who?' is a group of very successful punters who manipulate certain pools to profit. It's not the large wagers that go on at the jump that are critical, but more so the large wagers that go on the losers much earlier to inflate the prices of the dogs that will actually win. Very selective and ridiculously, lavishly & insanely profitable! :)

[Star]

Hi moeee
The 'who?' is a group of very successful punters who manipulate certain pools to profit. It's not the large wagers that go on at the jump that are critical, but more so the large wagers that go on the losers much earlier to inflate the prices of the dogs that will actually win. Very selective and ridiculously, lavishly & insanely profitable! :)Rails, I do not think that you and 'Moeee" are on the same tram in your explanation to him.

The question he asked in my opinion is of a more general nature unless I have misread him. it is a fact in Greyhounds, no matter what track or even class of race that the "informed money" goes on late. A lot is put through the Corporates who off load on to the Tabs at the last minute to balance their books.

That is a whole lot different to what you are saying about the very successful punters who attempt to manipulate the pools to their advantage. The last time they were able to do that was the sting at Gold Coast's Parkland when the dog, Lucy's Light who was a certainty and was well into the red just before the boxes opened.

Because of the small tote holds approx $5 to $10 thousand, four of the main chances had $5 thousand placed on each of them just before they jumped. causing Lucy's Light to blow out to about $4. The bitch won comfortably. The trainer Elaine Williamson was not even in on the sting.

But a bookie in Adelaide coped the brunt losing over $600,000 because he bet ' Best Tote " This bookie who's nickname was Curly was a bit upset. The brains behind the sting was alleged to be the owner of a few high class men's Clubs where the girls were reported to entertain a few high profile Nrl current and ex players.

But, the loop holes were closed fairly quickly so now the best you can get is middle tote which is a lot harder to manipulate.

Maybe, you are aware how they are able to manipulate the pools, because I cannot.

[rails run]

Rails, I do not think that you and 'Moeee" are on the same tram in your explanation to him.

The question he asked in my opinion is of a more general nature unless I have misread him. it is a fact in Greyhounds, no matter what track or even class of race that the "informed money" goes on late. A lot is put through the Corporates who off load on to the Tabs at the last minute to balance their books.

That is a whole lot different to what you are saying about the very successful punters who attempt to manipulate the pools to their advantage. The last time they were able to do that was the sting at Gold Coast's Parkland when the dog, Lucy's Light who was a certainty and was well into the red just before the boxes opened.

Because of the small tote holds approx $5 to $10 thousand, four of the main chances had $5 thousand placed on each of them just before they jumped. causing Lucy's Light to blow out to about $4. The bitch won comfortably. The trainer Elaine Williamson was not even in on the sting.

But a bookie in Adelaide coped the brunt losing over $600,000 because he bet ' Best Tote " This bookie who's nickname was Curly was a bit upset. The brains behind the sting was alleged to be the owner of a few high class men's Clubs where the girls were reported to entertain a few high profile Nrl current and ex players.

But, the loop holes were closed fairly quickly so now the best you can get is middle tote which is a lot harder to manipulate.

Maybe, you are aware how they are able to manipulate the pools, because I cannot.
Hi Star. The answer is Quinellas.
I hope I haven't stuck my nose in. I think moeee or Bhagwan once mentioned the dog prices change after the jump because it takes the tote up to a minute to calibrate, whereas most dog races are over in half that time. Cheers.

[Lord Greystoke]

Hi Star. The answer is Quinellas.
I hope I haven't stuck my nose in. I think moeee or Bhagwan once mentioned the dog prices change after the jump because it takes the tote up to a minute to calibrate, whereas most dog races are over in half that time. Cheers.

It was Bhagwan. Who else?

LG

[Star]

Hi Star. The answer is Quinellas.
I hope I haven't stuck my nose in. I think moeee or Bhagwan once mentioned the dog prices change after the jump because it takes the tote up to a minute to calibrate, whereas most dog races are over in half that time. Cheers.
Rails.

You certainly are not sticking your nose in, infact I am pleased you did. I was getting the impression that Moeee, Rails Run and myself may all be on different trams.

I agree because dog races are over so quick that last monies in take time to calculate and because afair quantity ofn the total pool is placed in the last minutes creates a jam.

Having said that I am having difficulty seeing how the pools can be maipulated by putting money on early or late. It all comes out in the wash anyway. Unless they are trying to fool the market and uneducated money, a sort of Johnathon Thurston or Joey " Show and Go" play blindsiding the public.

In greyhounds I do not think their is to much uneducated money that follow other punters leads, if their is , more the fool them.

I would be interested to know how early money can affect the final dividends.


Star

ps

I have edited that post because I thought it was LG but I see it was from Rails Run. Please read in that context.

[CosMos]

Introductory Geophysical Inverse Theory as mentioned by woof43...
http://mesoscopic.mines.edu/~jscales/gp605/snapshot.pdf

[beton]

Introductory Geophysical Inverse Theory as mentioned by woof43...
http://mesoscopic.mines.edu/~jscales/gp605/snapshot.pdf
CM Too busy now but that looks like the lightest bit of heavy reading that I will have done for a while.

[garyf]

Do your filtered results differ substantially from their original ratings.
I,m very prone to use inracing ratings as a odd on to r+s.
CheersMissed this one.

No not greatly D.D say about 2 full betting points,
In the old either way.

At the most say A.A.P. $3.0 me say $5.0-$6.0.
The other way me $8.0 A.A.P $4.0-$4.5.

This is A.A.P. F.F.5 and there prices me then.
Re rating them.

I never get say A.A.P. $3.0 me $21.0 or visa-versa.

If i did i would use another set of ratings the market then,
Becomes the final decision.

What i did find is this A.A.P $4.0 me $5.5 Don Scott $101.0,
And they are both Weight ratings i tend to think the bonuses,
And penalties for Don Scott is outdated

I used to ignore his prices and just look at the top 3-4-5,
And ignore what odds they were that's a long time ago now though.

They may have improved a lot since then.

Cheers.
Gary.

[darkydog2002]

I tend to stick with the old ratings that I,m used to ala Don Scott/inracing/Warren Block - usually based around WT Ratings but I,m old Fashioned but my hats off to to those who think there,s a better way and I encourage that.But I,m a old man and I hesitate to change anything thats made me a substaniatle profit for over 40 years.
Horses for courses I guess.
Cheers
darky

[garyf]

Good Luck with that then D/D.


Cheers.
Garyf.