Against all odds

[syllabus23]

For a humble punter like myself who does not have the ability of the magical 2%
to be able to read the trainers mind or discover the eureka filter I find it next to impossible to select winners @ $10 >.

Yesterday there were three race meetings for a total of twenty-three races.In ten of the twenty-three races the winner was $10> several of them astronomically so.

This is 43.5% of all races on the day.This figure is not unusual for either mid-week racing or the Saturday extravaganza.

The only figure in racing that does not surprise me is that 98% of punters lose.

I gave up trying to pick winners long ago,these days I concentrate on picking losers which keeps me in the game.Thank heavens for betfair.

[Lord Greystoke]

For a humble punter like myself who does not have the ability of the magical 2%
to be able to read the trainers mind or discover the eureka filter I find it next to impossible to select winners @ $10 >.

Yesterday there were three race meetings for a total of twenty-three races.In ten of the twenty-three races the winner was $10> several of them astronomically so.

This is 43.5% of all races on the day.This figure is not unusual for either mid-week racing or the Saturday extravaganza.



Not sure it's magic or reading minds.
More like roll up the sleeves and start looking for runners which...

(a) have won before in similar race, conditions
(b) can win today given field, conditions, weights, jock etc
(c) have been largely ignored by the market, punters

This takes work&time, rather than magic(or words that rythme?) - if I had to name an old fox whose 'style' fits with this gig, it would be...Barny!

You may need to turn your mind inside out to filter out the value embedded in his posts, however - more work, less magic.

Good luck, syllabus23!


LG

[darkydog2002]

Join the Club Syllabus23,
There,s no Magical Filter and Mind Readers I leave to the Charlatans.

Cheers.

[moeee]

I rarely have a $10 Winner as being my top selection in a race.
But I often have a $10 winner amongst my top 3 selections.
It sounds Syllabus23 that you are only backing the animal you think is the most likely winner.
Darkydog2002 narrows races down to as many as 6 selections , and he very often gets winners over the $10 Mark.

[gunny72]

If you want to experience backing longshot winners back the third and fourth ranked place percent horses in a race at Metropolitan meetings when the price is > $10 or better still > $20.

[Barny]

For Country events; Try a horse that's had at least two runs in, has career sts of say 10 to 20 or thereabouts, hasn't started for more than 28 days = Freshened (this is a big turn off), and has career wins of between 2 and 4. I've underlined the important factors.

By keeping the more popular filters out, you're actually increasing the odds on others. The thinking behind this is that the horse is overdue for a win, and surely the trainer wouldn't put it out for more than 28 days, bring it back if it wasn't fit !!

For Metro; Try a horse that's had 2 or 3 runs back, career sts 10 to 20 (still got some improvement), is going up to a distance that it either hasn't run at before or hasn't won at before. The "d" being important is a myth.

For Metro & Country; You could try backing a horse that's backing up within 4 to 6 days, and is increasing in weight from it's last start.

With all of the above, obviously one of your filters will be $10 to $20. There will be winners in this price range. If you can seek out an "Unpopular" filter that logically fits, then you've increased your odds ..... Stands to reason !!, coz the popular filters will decrease the odds to a point where they're overbet, so the balance has to be that the odds of horses with unpopular fitlers / form will increase in similar proportion to the decrease of the odds of those with popular filters.

[Barny]

LG, thanks for the compliment, but what I know about handicapping and the actual conveyance itself you could write on the back of a postage stamp ..... But I believe I don't need to know all the details. What continually blows me away, and continually reinforces my opinion of how to extract a quid from this caper is what woof43 posted this morning, and other similar postings of quality information.

woof43 - And in there lays the story of centipetal force and the effect of Mass.

The normal stable ring around on a friday, questions always generally revolve around Mass, fitness and sustained pace % of distance to max speed are the items always high on the agenda.

kenchar posted once about the most important piece of information ..... bloodcounts !! So with kenchar's bloodcounts and woof43's centipetal force & the effect of mass, you've got to ask yourself "Where does that leave me?" We're not inside the stable and we're not the Vet. But we're assuming that inside knowledge leads to backing winners, well IMHO (old age acronym for Is My Hearingaid On) it's not necessarily so. Inside info may lead to a reduction with losing bets, but surely horses surprise the stable at times. I'm also aware that a Christmas Bonus for some stable hands is that the stable sets a horse for a race and they're all on it ..... Fact or Fantasy ?! I don't know. What I do know is that these are things we'll never know. I'm absolutely certain that if we do the same as everyone else then we're consigned to being in that illustrious group of 98% of punters, big club isn't it ??

Geoff Murphy used to back his horses when they were better tha 4 / 1, because he assumed that with his S/R he couldn't lose. So do you look at the "races" and see horses coming back from a spell, say you spot a 4 y/o with decent form, and as a 3 y/o last time in work they won over 1400 3rd up ..... Logic would tell you that they're going to need an extra run this time in to get to peak fitness and also they may be tried at 1600m. So, pencil them in for 4th up over 1600m and unless it's form is absolutely miserable, back it for that one run over 1600m and maybe also the run after. This takes the mystery and overanalysis out of the equation. 90% of the posters / readers on here would analyse a race within an inch of it's existance ..... Is racing that scientific, and if so, how do they factor in one of the more important elements , LUCK? If you can "see" what the trainer sees, then let him or her do their job and you'll be well rewarded.

Keep it simple ..... the more I "enjoy" my database the more futile I see the exercise of being scientific in the world where LUCK plays such a major role in delivering an outcome.

[moeee]

How about providing members with a selection for todays races Barny?
Or tomorrows?

[Barny]

How about providing members with a selection for todays races Barny?
Or tomorrows?
The high esteem with which I'm held on this forum would see an avalanche of money being plunged on my selection moeee, it would certainly lead to carnage, even to a suspension of betting. It could be known as Barnygate, and the racing industry is already up to it's ears with Nicolic and Oliver, it doesn't need one more high profile person being involved in an investigation moeee. Also my identity would be exposed moeee, and if you've tuned into Play School recently then you would surely have seen me ..... I don't need this at all.

As much as I'd like to help out my fellow man, drag them up from the gutter so to speak, and put them on the path to riches, I simply cannot. The Fabric of society, as we know it could be jeoparised. It's that fine a line moeee.

[moeee]

As much as I'd like to help out my fellow man and put them on the path to riches, I simply cannot.
Yeah - Same with me.
But i do make an effort.
I try to treat Gambling with the seriousness that it deserves.
I'm sure there are a number of members who are having difficulties and deserve a winning selection.

[Barny]

I'm sure there are a number of members who are having difficulties and deserve a winning selection.
ONE winning selection (and there's no guarantees) could not possibly solve any difficulties that some members that your alluding to might have. No matter how you approach your punting there's information in abundance on here that will enable you to fine tune your methods and get into profit. It's all about research. There's probably hundreds of systems on here that can be tested for accuracy, there's a mountain of information on ratings and handicapping, odds, percentages. Whatever your area of interest is, there's plenty of brilliant posts on here to steer you in the right direction. So while I'm sympathetic to those members you point out moeee that need a winning selection, medium to long term its useless for them. Give me your email moeee and I'll send you a couple of selections over the weekend .....

[Lord Greystoke]

No matter how you approach your punting there's information in abundance on here that will enable you to fine tune your methods and get into profit. It's all about research. There's probably hundreds of systems on here that can be tested for accuracy, there's a mountain of information on ratings and handicapping, odds, percentages. Whatever your area of interest is, there's plenty of brilliant posts on here to steer you in the right direction.

And in there lays the benefit of research, time & effort
And the effect of consulting the wisdom of the Mass(es) and Niche thinkers on here..

Go to it syllabus23..
You already have everything you need!

Cheers LG

[moeee]

And in there lays the benefit of research, time & effort

Go to it syllabus23..
You already have everything you need!

Cheers LG
So you are implying that Syllabus23 hasn't done any research!!
Is that how it is Syllabus23? - have you not made an effort?

[moeee]

Give me your email moeee and I'll send you a couple of selections over the weekend .....
email them to Syllabus23

[Lord Greystoke]

For a humble punter like myself who does not have the ability of the magical 2%
to be able to read the trainers mind or discover the eureka filter I find it next to impossible to select winners @ $10 >.



LOL

Moeee, you will note syllabus23's original post above and my follow up posts which suggest that one does not need ability, magic, mind reading or a eureka filter to come up with winners. Just some additional research - a lot of which can be conducted on here.

How much research syllabus23 has already conducted is a matter for him to decide.

Cheers LG

[Barny]

The best piece of information I can give comes from Chrome Prince who claims to have busted every MYTH in racing. If you read some of Garyf's posts you will also see that he blows up some myths too. My advice is to once again go directly against some of the more popular filters .....

This is hard to do as you might not know what you're really looking for.

So, have a look at your Herald Sun form guide, FRONT PAGE only !!!!!, and you can not only knock out half a dozen, you can put IN filters to the contrary ..... and THAT is where a LOT can turn into a decent POT. Can't happen can it ?!?!

The popular filters to have IN are "c", "t" and "d", LSW, TopWeight, Good Barrier .....

What do you think would happen if you looked for a horse with NONE of the above ?? 98% of the squirrel heads masquerading as punters living on bread and dripping, drinking cask wine, smoking OP's and wearing strides that are being held up with a dressing gown belt and a well worn paisley shirt and dress thongs would be absolutely sure that the S/R would diminish, and diminish fairly substantially ..... That's a whole lot of racings folklore / myths "bundled" into one big ball of an absolutely certain LOT. Don't take my ramblings as anything other than ramblings, test 'em.

[SpeedyBen]

If you want to experience backing longshot winners back the third and fourth ranked place percent horses in a race at Metropolitan meetings when the price is > $10 or better still > $20.Does this make a profit, Gunny, or is it a way to back some longshot winners?

[syllabus23]

Syllabus23, you have been TOUd. Post deleted. You are welcome to disagree. However, you have come on here to add nothing constructive. Please take your flaming, baiting and ridiculing of members to a Forum where anything goes. It is NOT allowed here. No more warnings. Take careful note of this moderation comment. Moderator.

[Barny]

Join the Club Syllabus23,
There,s no Magical Filter
darkydog2002, you dont have a database so really you cannot say with conviction that "There's no Magical Filter". There ARE filters which with the flick of a button CAN alter a LOT of say 30% into a POT of say 30% without dropping the number of selections down to too few. Given you one under the heading of "Pssst", and I'm and I'm not !!!!!

[Barny]

Does this make a profit, Gunny, or is it a way to back some longshot winners?I ran it through and couldn't get it into POT. Maybe there's a couple of other filters Gunny uses.

[Lord Greystoke]

The best piece of information I can give comes from Chrome Prince who claims to have busted every MYTH in racing. If you read some of Garyf's posts you will also see that he blows up some myths too. My advice is to once again go directly against some of the more popular filters .....

This is hard to do as you might not know what you're really looking for.

So, have a look at your Herald Sun form guide, FRONT PAGE only !!!!!, and you can not only knock out half a dozen, you can put IN filters to the contrary ..... and THAT is where a LOT can turn into a decent POT. Can't happen can it ?!?!

The popular filters to have IN are "c", "t" and "d", LSW, TopWeight, Good Barrier .....

What do you think would happen if you looked for a horse with NONE of the above ?? 98% of the squirrel heads masquerading as punters living on bread and dripping, drinking cask wine, smoking OP's and wearing strides that are being held up with a dressing gown belt and a well worn paisley shirt and dress thongs would be absolutely sure that the S/R would diminish, and diminish fairly substantially ..... That's a whole lot of racings folklore / myths "bundled" into one big ball of an absolutely certain LOT. Don't take my ramblings as anything other than ramblings, test 'em.

Great post Barny... the last para is still killing me LMBO - so many visuals.. LMFBO !

LG

[SpeedyBen]

Thanks barny. I know Gunny chooses his words carefully and he didn't say that it makes a profit.

[Lord Greystoke]

Geez thanks fellers I didnt realize it was so simple,,,you must all be 2%ers and rich with it.....I doubt very much.

With all due respect to you syllabus23, given your response above.. have we wasted our time posting our best efforts considerations for your attention.

Not one response above to your original post above that I can see, alludes to it being simple or even that any of us are in the 2% and rich with it. Just that the answers are all there / here if you look for them.

One or two learning lessons here for me at least, I believe.

Good luck with your efforts on the lay side, in any case.

LG

[Barny]

Great post Barny... the last para is still killing me LMBO - so many visuals.. LMFBO !

LG
I had you in mind when I was constructing that post LG ;)

[Lord Greystoke]

Keep em coming Barny. Funnily enough, I was seeing you in the pictures you presented and I am still LMAO! (sigh.. wiping away the tears)

This is even better than the visual of you getting around the first turn at mooney valley and already running out of puff, as per your earlier post.

LG

[Barny]

There's always some interesting stuff to read LG, you just need patience to read your way through some of the nonsense at times, you need to be a little loopy to punt ..... If syllabus23 does no more than read a few of garyf's recent posts, then he's got his moneys worth.

[Lord Greystoke]

You are correct there, Barny.

My suspicions are that he will not necessarily follow the garyf lead up as he appears to have given up the ghost on picking winners.

But I may be wrong, syllabus23?

Now, where is that bl dressing gown belt of mine and box of red dot special vino... !


LG

[syllabus23]

Syllabus23, you have been TOUd. Post deleted. You are welcome to disagree. However, you have come on here to add nothing constructive. Please take your flaming, baiting and ridiculing of members to a Forum where anything goes. It is NOT allowed here. No more warnings. Take careful note of this moderation comment. Moderator.

[Lord Greystoke]

Enuff said, Mr Ed.

Time to move on, chaps.

LG

[syllabus23]

Syllabus23, you have been TOUd. Post deleted. You are welcome to disagree. However, you have come on here to add nothing constructive. Please take your flaming, baiting and ridiculing of members to a Forum where anything goes. It is NOT allowed here. No more warnings. Take careful note of this moderation comment. Moderator.

[Barny]

kenchar, to the best of my knowledge only gave away the info on blood counts once. Now this may be bread and butter to some on here who have an in depth knowledge of racehorses, but it was an interesting read. He said if the bloodcounts were not spot on then they would not back the horse, they'd run it but wouldn't bet on it. So you can shrug your shoulders and say so what, there's nothing I can do, or you can have a good hard think about how this info affects your punting.

I could write a couple of pages on what I got out of this throw away line, but I also needed other info gleaned from this site as well to put the pieces together. Let's assume the horse loses ..... do we accept that we don't know why the horse lost, or do we "find" that it hadn't won at that weight before ?? Ah Ha !!! An incorrect assumption !!! And we use that info in the future and the effect of all this snowballs. THAT'S precisely what I get out of info like "bloodcounts weren't spot on". We cannot always / mostly know for sure what reasons there are for a horse being beaten, or running below par, but some of us sure do a lot of research and come up with incorrect assumptions time after time after time. I'm sure there's times when the stable don't know what happened, then how the heck are we supposed to know. A good read on this stuff is punter57 who blasts the scientific mindset in a game where there are so many variables that cannot be quantified.

[moeee]

Well done,,,,"You've all done very well" as Mr Grace would say.
I don't think that is the way to get useful advice syllabus23.

I know I get depressed when I hit a losing run , but I also know that getting useful advice is very difficult.
Whether members are part of the 2% or not should not concern you.
Concern yourself with knowledge divulged by those that are.
The Search button will be your best friend here.
Don't be frightened to go a long way back.

[gunny72]

My suggestion does not give a pot overall but does have some good runs and does get some great longshots if that is the aim. Surprisingly it works best from March to November and has given me some profit years in that period. Try Brisbane 13/10/12 for an example.

[norisk]

Bloodcounts, shmodcounts - all more stuff 'we cannot know', or perhaps if the horse is in a 'wealthy' stable & gets solidly backed, I guess we can assume it's blood is good.

Will go out on a limb & say that more good blood loses than wins...

[Barny]

Post deleted as it is quoting a disrespectful and now moderated post. Moderator.

[Vortech]

ONE winning selection (and there's no guarantees) could not possibly solve any difficulties that some members that your alluding to might have. No matter how you approach your punting there's information in abundance on here that will enable you to fine tune your methods and get into profit. It's all about research. There's probably hundreds of systems on here that can be tested for accuracy, there's a mountain of information on ratings and handicapping, odds, percentages. Whatever your area of interest is, there's plenty of brilliant posts on here to steer you in the right direction. So while I'm sympathetic to those members you point out moeee that need a winning selection, medium to long term its useless for them. Give me your email moeee and I'll send you a couple of selections over the weekend .....
From the forum front to back I'm testing every system with a random selection period. Found some interesting systems that are working like this baby

Sydney Races on Saturday, Horses 4--6, Metro LS, Only going up 1kg max and LS Margin Less than 4 lengths.

Basically I'm testing through to the end of 2011. Calling these my bronze systems.

I'll re-test them all over 2012 once completed. If they met the criteria and make a certain POT they hit the Silver systems.
Again the test is applied over 2013 making at the end a selecton of Gold Systems. I'm assuming only maybe 4 max will make it this far but as I've learnt from John West only back the best!

I'm agreeing with you Barny on all of these scientic information is often too much at the end of the day.

I'm currently read through to 2006 posts on the forum with 9 systems making the cut so far!

I'lll start a new thread from 1st of Jan called the Silver Systems!

So Barny keep your systems rolling. The facts are they can be tested and monitored going forward.

[Lord Greystoke]

Interesting stuff.. Who would be the most prolific systems maestro on your list to date ie with systems that still work = 'baby' - bronze category?

Cheers LG

[Vortech]

I have used a couple of Wesmip rules and configured a little as I couldn't get all the rules tested around the R&S site.

But looking at all the systems in place the top 3 rules are as follows which are used in around 70% of the systems

Metro Last STart = Y, Age of Horse, Starting PRice

Not far behind is Place %. and Track condition.

The rest is very random!

[Barny]

I'm agreeing with you Barny on all of these scientic information is often too much at the end of the day.

Vortech, I do believe there are a couple of posters on here who do the scientific stuff that would have my head spinning. They're looking for an edge in an area where they believe they have expertise ..... I'm thinking my simplistic approach frustrates the bejeezus out of them because they know what they're doing works (or does it?). I'll concede there's more than one way to skin a cat.

[Barny]

I have used a couple of Wesmip rules and configured a little as I couldn't get all the rules tested around the R&S site.

But looking at all the systems in place the top 3 rules are as follows which are used in around 70% of the systems

Metro Last STart = Y, Age of Horse, Starting PRice

Not far behind is Place %. and Track condition.

The rest is very random!
Give the place percentage the big Heave Ho, there was discussion on this a fair while ago and apparently it used to work, but not anymore. It's a Malcolm Knowles filter and he said it was the only "stand alone" filter he'd ever seen that shows a profit. But I think that's old news

Throw in this and get back to me ..... Zero wins over the distance !! If this doesn't improve your system I'll streak naked when Camilla Parker Bowles is presenting the Cup and give her a kiss !!. I've got 5 other beauts too.

[Barny]

Sorry Vortech, I shouldn't be so arrogant to say give the place % the Heave Ho, I sound like I know everything ..... Just test it is all ;)

[Vortech]

Sorry Vortech, I shouldn't be so arrogant to say give the place % the Heave Ho, I sound like I know everything ..... Just test it is all ;)
Can be used in 2 elements
1. Defined set of parameters eg. between 50%
2. Ranking order from highest to lowest