Something of Interest

[Barny]

I’m sharing this concept as a favour, take it or leave it but while trawling though old posts a fair while ago I wondered if I personally knew this certain poster. Sounded eerily like a mate who’s a pro punter on cards and horses but didn’t share too much. Something just gave him away?, like mention of where he lives and the way he punts etc. Well guess what? I recently ran into him and asked whether he has posted on here. Yup it’s him. This dude is retiring and we reckon it’s OK to share his concept. Can’t do any harm, can’t kill anyone. lol. Certainly can’t kill the odds ‘coz there’s not enough info there for you.


You'll note I haven't been here for a while, too busy learning this method and I hope you can too.<O:p< p O:p<> This concept has been successfully employed for more than four decades, I can vouch for that. He’s never worked! With respect to cards, he used to go to the casino and leave when he was in front without doing too much damage on the worst of days. He made a living at it, and the horses.
This is not down to me, I asked if I could include it in this post, he lived by it ….. “The thing that has the most chance of repeating is that which is in your first line of vision”


<O:p< p O:p<>We currently use 4 systems based on the most simple of rules one could imagine! And one stable of four horses. We have other systems that we swap with those listed from time to time, but it doesn’t matter too much, it’s not critical. The mix of 4 systems must be that they’re not too alike and have a similar number of selections month in month out.


<O:p< p O:p<>Currently we’re using systems based on …..


<O:p< p O:p<>1)Tipsters poll – PERMANENT SYSTEM
2)Win S/R % (with prizemoney as an important race filter)
3)Topweight system
4)Won a couple of starts ago by a decent margin in the current campaign (YUP!) and,
5)A stable of four “blackbooked” horses – PERMANENT SYSTEM



<O:p< p O:p<>The systems employed need to have a win strike rate of about one in six

All transactions / records / selections / bets are in chronological order


<O:p< p O:p<>Bet only Saturdays - in Melbourne and Sydney each week and during the
Commence betting only when there has been more than 12 losses in a row

Never bet anything shorter than 4 / 1 (TAB $5.00) or longer than 33 / 1 (TAB $34.00)

Where there is more than one selection in a race take the horse that’s most favoured in the market


<O:p< p O:p<>This is not a loss chasing method


<O:p< p O:p<>This punter made better than wages week in week out and I take my hat off to him


<O:p< p O:p<>I know what you’re thinking ….. it’s no better than just one system with a win S/R of 1 in 6

No more posts from me at all on this method unless I've completely overlooked something
</O:p<></O:p<></O:p<></O:p<></O:p<></O:p<></O:p<></O:p<></O:p<>

[Vortech]

Without giving too much away did the Posters name start with "S"?

[Try Try Again]

Thanks for the post Barny. You always get the "grey matter" working.

[Star]

Without giving too much away did the Posters name start with "S"?
Well, I can tell you it was not this poster who has a name starting with " S " but you guys worked that out pretty quickly. lol

Strangely, I can sort of understand the thinking behind Barny's friend, because I have been playing around with something that is earilly similar especially the minimum acceptable price and my variation of the 12 losses. Odd that that is the exact same number before getting serious.

I made that 12 up for me, the odds somebody else using that number is interesting especially when some of the other things Barny mentioned are on the same tram.

Pete

[Vortech]

I think at the end of the day you can't restrict yourself to the rules someone else is using.

Use their ideas - do your testing - make your own modifications - learn from your mistakes.

[Barny]

I'm surprised there hasn't been more discussion on this.

Then again, a system has to reflect a punters character or it's useless to them. In case you didn't notice there's a "free" beaten favourites system embedded into the method, not to mention one other brilliant concept that was posted on here many years ago and also went unloved.

..... and the thing that didn't come out in the original post was the inclusion of the Brisbane Carnival.

This concept is good, damned good folks.

See you in a week or two. Luv the top sires thread!

[jose]

Bit too cryptic for mine Barny.

[SpeedyBen]

earilly similar especially the minimum acceptable price and my variation of the 12 losses. Odd that that is the exact same number before getting serious.

I made that 12 up for me, the odds somebody else using that number is interesting especially when some of the other things Barny mentioned are on the same tram.

PeteThere was a system published in the early 70s which was given to me some time ago called The Universal System which involved following any tipster who had had a run of at least 12 outs with his top tip after he broke the run with a winner. If he went 20 outs with his top tip you started to follow him from the 21st selection without waiting for a winner. I still have the book somewhere.

[Vortech]

A similar concept could be used when they strike a run of winners and then start laying there selections.

Also what stoping a punter from applying this to favourites when they have 12 non-winners and jumping on them.

[stugots]

Exactly Vortech, the theory could be applied to almost any pursuit, late mail, tatts ratings, neurals, the list goes on.

Just out of interest I had a quick look at applying it to my ratings & 'unmitigated disaster' just about describes the outcome, the problem is as many punters can attest, is that winners are often clustered & most profits made when that run of winners is struck.

[Barny]

jose, it's not cryptic at all. I've mentioned that it's not a loss chasing method. Most won't bother with this for a couple of reasons, 1) that it's not handed to them on a platter and 2) even if it were, most wouldn't follow it because it doesn't suit their style. Books have been written on this subject alone, mainly about stockmarket traders, but it's relevance spreads to the punt too. It doesn't suit their style .....

This concept is all about betting heavily when you strike a winning run and maximising your profits.

The average punter / speculator will "lock in a small profit" for fear of losing it, but then let a loss run out of control. It's human nature.

Think about the above statement. I said I wouldn't post anymore on this but there's no point not to. I'm imploring those who haven't as yet settled on a method of investing (gambling is not knowing what you're doing, that is playing roiulette when the odds are against you - investing is when you have risk management controls in place and a system) to look into this concept. The systems in play here are obviously winning ones, and are able to be replaced by better ones. Thus, what becomes unprofitable is updated, but because we have several methods to follow the fact that one system isn't working won't break the bank. The "stable" cannot be proven by stats obviously, it's like using the fundamentals in the stockmarket. The combination of selection method is so powerful that risk management can be utilised, and is an important feature for staying in the game.

I can't see anything that I've left out, or as jose has suggested, anything cryptic. If you cannot at least grasp the concept, then I'd suggest you give away the punt entirely. It's brilliant. 95% of punters lose ???, this does what the 95% don't do, and with risk management priciples employed.

[jose]

I'll have to give the punt away the.

[jose]

"then"

[Vortech]

[QUOTE=Barny]

Commence betting only when there has been more than 12 losses in a row

Never bet anything shorter than 4 / 1 (TAB $5.00) or longer than 33 / 1 (TAB $34.00)

Where there is more than one selection in a race take the horse that’s most favoured in the market


When you find the system has 12 losses in a row and you start to bet on the horses, when do you start your cycle again?