Unleash The Beast (The Sequel)

[Barny]

I've had a few small things go my way recently for the first time for yonks. Had a horror year or two losing my better half this year after a long battle with cancer. I've found many people in the same boat, it's unusual, and I'm posting this 'coz someone who needs a lift may just get something out of it, and it may be just the distraction they need.

Sit down with a drink, you're in for a treat !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I’ve invented the mother of all systems and I’m prepared to share the concept.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

Every conceivable method of testing, has this in serious profit. It’s definitely outside the square as far as systems go, but it is a system in it’s true sense, with definite rules. It’s a system where an original base of six filters is consistently used for the purpose of “following a horse” for a certain number of starts with the introduction of different filters at various stages of it’s campaign / each run after the original base of filters. It’s absolutely brilliant in that it “accepts” bad luck, bad placement by the trainer etc, etc, and feeds off the increased odds when the form “looks bad”, but this only happens at one run in the campaign. Good form is taken into account in only one of the horse’s runs after it qualifies. The other two runs after the original base filters, the form doesn’t matter. One run has poor form allocated as a filter. When these horses qualify the system shows a healthy POT, and after these horses qualify, the system shows a POT on their first run, the system shows a POT on the second run and so on, every run for the next four starts !!!!! Not for each individual horse obviously, but the overall system for each and every start turns a profit. The original base filters have six rules. For runs one, two, three and four after the horse qualifies, there are additional filters included, three filters for run number one and two after qualifying, two filters for runs number three and four, after qualification.

<o:p></o:p>

A further example of how this works. Horse qualifies, we back it – 1st run after it qualifies we add three additional filters to the base filters, 2nd run we add three different filters to the original base filters (we take out the three additional filters for the 1st run after the horse qualifies and replace it with a different set of three additional filters ….. in this case we take advantage of the horse being overlooked by the market for one bad run) …. , 3rd & 4th run after qualification we add two filters (nothing to do with form) to the original base filters. Note; whenever we add filters, they’re only added to the original base filters. The additional filters for 1st run after qualification for instance, is the only time those particular filters are used. They’re not added permanently, the only permanent filters are the base filters, of which there are six and they are included in all runs.

<o:p></o:p>

It’s the ideal system really, it takes into account everything that the races can throw at you and returns the favour with better odds when the horse runs poorly, and also takes into account natural progression / improvement / good form of horses as they go through the classes. The key are the factors around the qualifying race.

<o:p></o:p>

[Try Try Again]

Hi Barny,

I congratulate you on your hard work to get a system that shows a POT at each and every stage. The nay sayers will want to you to release the rules. I say keep them to yourself and reap the benefits you have worked so hard to achieve. Others could also achieve similar results if they are willing to work at it. It's funny that the harder you work the better the results you get.

Good on you.

Sorry to hear about your loss this year. I hope 2013 will be your year!

[Barny]

The rules are pretty simple really. The concept is about "following" a horse, so if you stay on that theme you're in the ball park. I've no problems discussing the concept. After the horse qualifies you obviously back it. If it runs poorly, you get better odds at it's next start, and it's a chance too, coz the "qualifying run" will indicate it's a good horse. The following rules are sound too.

I don't mind the nay sayers having a dig in this instance 'coz this is something that can be debated and because I'm not going to post the rules, they can go for their lives. They'll be arguing against a concept, not data.

"Never argue with an idiot, they'll wear you down and beat you with experience" ;)

[Try Try Again]

I am interested in the concept. For the qualifying run does the horse have to win or do you find several horses could qualify from the same race?

[Barny]

That's an extremely interesting thought Try Try Again. I've spent years looking at single races and wondering what would happen if you followed the first three for the next campaign. But no, not in this case.

The qualifying run is NOT the run with the best POT. It could be the run with a sensational POT, but then it restricts the number of selections for runs two, three and four after qualifying, and it's not representative of what is seen as a normal campaign for a 3, 4 or even 5 year old. I've sacrificed a really good POT on the qualifying run so that the rest of the runs have what would be a normal campaign, one or two bad runs, maybe not, it caters for a succession of wins too, increasing in class and maybe distance, not that it matters. I'll give you an example ..... The qualifying run includes a minimum and maximum number of runs, then the next run will have horses who have their number of runs in the range increase from the previous run (obviously) so on until the 5 th run of the campaign. These form one of the base filters. If a horse is still running at "at least" its 5th run this time in, then the trainer must think it's a chance.

The qualifying run is the key. I'm sure that this concept could be applied differently in terms of the filters I use for the qualifying run, but my filters select horses that produce a POT overall, that is over their next few runs prior to going for a spell.

[Try Try Again]

Hi Barny,

So you are looking for lightly raced horses that have won in the Metro area (I'm basing this on one of your previous threads that horses will win again within 5 starts).

The qualifying race is obviously the key otherwise you would have to follow too many last start winners.

Food for thought Barny. Thanks

[Barny]

Hi Barny,

So you are looking for lightly raced horses that have won in the Metro area (I'm basing this on one of your previous threads that horses will win again within 5 starts).

The qualifying race is obviously the key otherwise you would have to follow too many last start winners.

Food for thought Barny. Thanks
The thread you are referring to was an original by Shaun, who had observed that a horse that had won in the city would win again 70% of the time within five runs. But you're right Try Try Again, I do like someone who can join the dots, well done!

[Try Try Again]

Hi Barny,

Do you just concentrate on one city, say Melbourne. or do you follow this concept throughout Australia (or maybe overseas)?

[Barny]

Metro Australia.

The beauty of this system is that you can look (??) for the qualifying run, in the Sportsman for example, for investigative purposes, for any one of the horses last five runs and see how you would have fared. I quite frequently look though old Sportsmans & HS form guides for "the qualifying run" and spot when it won after "the qualifying run" and it's random. Good form, poor form, freshened, up in distance, down in distance ..... It is a "follow the horse" system without any doubt, BUT, it's off a base set of filters with parameters broad enough to include a large number of selections going forward. There's also a large enough number of selections at any "run" to satisfy those on here who've dismissed some of my systems because they don't have enough selections. There's no way I'm going to nominate how many selections 'coz it'll only result in nitpicking. Take it or leave it, but some on here will re-adjust their thinking and investigation as a result of this system I've put up.

[jose]

Speaking of beasts, did anyone watch "The Royle Family" when it was on telly?

One particular episode Jim was o the couch and happened to have his fly open.
When Barb pointed it out, he stated that "The cage may be open but the beast is asleep".
To which Barb remarks "Beast my a-r-s-e"

Funny stuff IMO.

[Try Try Again]

Man after my own heart Barny.

Herald Sun and The Sportsman - a great way to start!

Although I do also use the Racenet website on Wednesday afternoon to get the fields.

[Vortech]

A good post Barny! Your comments are valid and a good start to a solid system

[syllabus23]

The betting strategy with this would be some form of Martingale ???

[darkydog2002]

No good any of us tipping in the weekly tipping contest now then if Barnys going to win it every week.

Oh well it was fun for awhile .

[Barny]

It's a shame for you DD that there's not a competition for tired, worn out, old systems that don't work !! .... You'd be rolling in it !!

[Vortech]

Thats a 2 stroke penalty Barny!

[darkydog2002]

Being somewhat of a modest gent I cant say they were all mine - only the ones that actually work.

Look forward though to your selections when you decide to post them.

Cheers

[Barny]

DD, There's no way I'm going to post them, and there's no way I'm going to post any of my systems with results, and it's down to you and two others on here. The method I did post is unlike anything that's previosuly been put up, other than a strict "follow the horse" system, and I do hope it gives others a bit of thought music. You only see a further opportunity to criticise.

[darkydog2002]

You get me wrong Barny.
I,m only giving you a bit of light hearted encouragement.
Cheers.

[Barny]

You get me wrong Barny.
I,m only giving you a bit of light hearted encouragement.
Cheers.
I'll accept your comments DD, and apologise for getting it wrong ..... sincerely!

[Try Try Again]

Hi Barny,

I've got out the old Sportsman's and Herald Sun formguides and I'm investigating your concept.

I have a few questions if that's okay.

1. When you consider the "qualifying" race are these always Saturday meetings or could they be Public Holiday, midweek or night meetings as well?

2. If you only look at horse's that have had say 5-20 starts, what do you do if the qualifying run is their 18th start and as you are going to follow then for their next 5 starts, this will take them passed their 20th run. What do you do?

3. If the horse wins at say its 2nd start after the qualifying run do you continue to follow it for the next 3 runs (total of 5) or is it eliminated unless this winning run is also a qualifying run?

Thanks for your very interesting thread.

[Barny]

Metro is one of the rules Try Try Again, and is one the the six rules that follows the horse all the way through it's next five runs. I look at horses with a much narrower range than you've said, and they start lower than 5.

We have Qualifying set of filters that stay with us all through the five starts.

Start 1 - We back it

Start 2 - To back it we're looking for a poor run in it's previous start. There's really only one additional filter added here to the Q filters.

Start 3 - To back it we're looking for good form at it's previous 2 starts. There's two additional filters added here to the Q filters (Note; the additional filter added to Start 2 is removed)

Start 4 and 5 - We use only the original set of filters and it doesn't matter what the horse did in starts 2 & 3. The only changes to the Q filters are obviously the number of runs ('coz they've had a couple more since the Q run), and the number of runs from a spell for the same reason. Logic here is that the trainer still has the horse in work and must see something. Interesting to note that there's only a 20% drop in the number of selections from the Q run to the 5th run, it's a stat that surprised me and trust me I've checked and double checked this stat. Start 5 shows the best POT, and that too surprised me, and I've checked and double checked this too.

I've actually given you the lot here, don't bother asking about Start 2 & 3 contradicting each other, think about when and why we're having a bet.

I reckon there would be quite a few different scenarios that you could apply to get a very good set of Q filters that can be used to "follow" a horse for it's next few runs, with only a logical tweak here and there required.

[Barny]

Don Scott likes lightly raced horses because of their potential and says to bet heavily on them (circumstances being right of course). Don Scott also say that winners keep winning.

[Try Try Again]

Hi Barny,

Thanks for the information!

What do you consider a poor run?

Is it running out of a place or beaten more than a certain margin say 3 lengths?

Do you find some States perform better than others or is pretty consistent? I ask this because I generally only bet on Melbourne races.

[Barny]

I've posted the concept and then some, that'll do. If you've got a database then you'll be able to have a bit of fun entering in all types of scenarios. It's not that I'm interested in keeping "all the rules to myself", it's just that I know this forum and I would be really p1ssed off getting bagged for what I consider is a different method and a good and helpful post.

cheers, Barny

[Barny]

Do you find some States perform better than others or is pretty consistent? I ask this because I generally only bet on Melbourne races.
One thing I will mention, and it'll give you a clue .....I've mentioned before about the large discrepancies between NSW and Vic results and on every occasion my filters have included Race Prizemoney and Weight Variances, so I've assumed these two filters are out of sync between NSW and Vic. I've asked about this but sadly no-one has been able to, or wanted to give an answer.

[Try Try Again]

No worries Barny,

Thanks again for a very interesting concept, it certainly has got my thoughts racing.

Unfortunately, I don't have a data base and have to go through things the old fashion way with, as I said previously, old Sportsman's and Herald Sun's (except for having Excel!). It does take longer but I get the thrill out of the chase!

I enjoy working out systems with >50% POT and a few bets per Saturday. It doesn't suit me to have thousands of bets so I can get 5-10% POT.

Good luck with your "Horses to Follow"!

[Barny]

I enjoy working out systems with >50% POT and a few bets per Saturday. It doesn't suit me to have thousands of bets so I can get 5-10% POT.

Good luck with your "Horses to Follow"!There are 50% POT systems, which have logic attached to them. I also agree on keeping your powder dry and waiting for a decent bet. Of all the books I've read on punting, the biographies of famous bookies, stories about the turf, one thing that's common to a lot of these stories is that ONE BIG win. Contrary to popular opinion on here, I believe that if you have a system that selects a really good lightly raced horse you're in with a good chance. ALL of my good systems are centred around lightly raced horses. One of them has only a few bets each month in Vic, but when your filters include a decent S/R, Metro, lightly raced and up in class, then you're not going to have many selections are you? Think Sincero ..... there's many others like that and at good odds too. But you have to be patient and wait. I'd rather have one decent bet each week and follow a logical system than backing neddies here there and everywhere. Also a longshot system, which there are many marketed, is absolutely fraught with danger ..... miss a winner and it's goodnight for a year or so.

If you want to put up some of the filters you're playing around with, don't be specific, and I'll give you a heads up if I can. Sort of like the Weights and Prizemoney and the variances between NSW and Vic. I've always liked a horse with a really good Win S/R, plenty of good winners, but plenty of losers too until I looked at interstate, NZ, and even o'seas horses, and also horse going up in class. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Few bets with a systems that picks out a lightly raced, good horse, going up in class will do me.

[Shaun]

I have only just read this thread and am glad you have found some good info in what i have posted in the past.

A question was posted in staking if you use a martingale betting approach?

If it was me i would not, i would just use the natural progression of longer prices for losers to bring in the profit and if the price is lower on a winner than needed i would accept this and rejoice in the big overs on other runners.

Limiting the amount of races you follow a horse for will increase the profit i think the sweet spot is 5-6

[Barny]

I have only just read this thread and am glad you have found some good info in what i have posted in the past.

A question was posted in staking if you use a martingale betting approach?

If it was me i would not, i would just use the natural progression of longer prices for losers to bring in the profit and if the price is lower on a winner than needed i would accept this and rejoice in the big overs on other runners.

Limiting the amount of races you follow a horse for will increase the profit i think the sweet spot is 5-6
Level stakes Shaun.

[Barny]

Found these comments on this forum ...... Luv 'em.

There are many systems which operate on rules like "must have placed in last start" or "must be LSW" or "must be placed at least once in past three" etc. All these ideas ARE NONSENSE. We want to get on horses which "frighten" the mass of spot players AWAY. It's clear that finishing positions tell you nothing at all about the class of race; how the race was run etc etc. We don't care about that EXCEPT that we know others DO.


It's about "perception" and "appearance" NOT sense.

..... and the author was ?????

If Shaun is reading this I reckon he might know.
<O:p</O:p

[Vortech]

sounds like either crash or punter57

[Barny]

sounds like either crash or punter57
Too good vortech, p57 'twas. I did enter his longshot system into my database, best I could, and the S/R was terrible.

[darkydog2002]

Hi Barny ,
Have there been any bets since you posted?
Cheers
darky

[Barny]

Hi Barny ,
Have there been any bets since you posted?
Cheers
darky
Yes, there has actually.

[SpeedyBen]

Too good vortech, p57 'twas. I did enter his longshot system into my database, best I could, and the S/R was terrible.The strike rate was indeed terrible but it did select some amazing winners including a Canberra Cup winner at over $100. I followed it for fun for about a year and quit when EI hit the industry but the thrill of backing 50/1, 60/1 and 80/1 winners was terrific even if only for small stakes.

[Barny]

Speedy, I have every word uttered by punter57 on the longshot thread. It's the best thread I've read on here. Would have loved to have read his visiting trainers thpoughts too but it appears to have gone.

[darkydog2002]

Hi Barny,
What were they?