Blazing saddles 1,2,3

Well. I'm still here. I've been testing my winning saddlecloth system over the last few melbourne race meetings, having a theoretical bank of $1000 for numbers 1,2 and 3. With a $3000 bank, so far I would have accumulated well over $2500, That's after about 110 races. That is betting to cover losses and make $50 on each winner 1,2 or 3.
Can anyone see anything inherently wrong with this system. I can't really

Cheers megamoos

[ginger]

hi megamoos the day has come
just a quick question with my quick calcs you have possibly outaid $3000 to $10000 is that right
cya

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ginger on 2004-03-27 10:15 ]</font>

[Bhagwan]

What you might like to do is do the maths on how much you are hehind if tou strike 8 outs in a row ,I feel you might find it frightening & 8 outs in a row, for this idea, do & will eventually occure so make sure you have a "what if plan" if this should occure.

[Paddy]

How does your "winning saddlecloth system" work again, megamoos?

[Chrome Prince]

megamoos,

Interested to know, are you target betting each TAB number to win $50 or dutch betting all three to win $50.
I'm thinking the former because you say you allocated a bank of $1000 to each.

You've got me thinking so I'm going to run some hypotheticals and get back to you.

[Chrome Prince]

No luck, couldn't get it below 6% LOT, maybe you have a secret :wink:

[puntz]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: puntz on 2004-05-06 12:34 ]</font>

[costanza]

This looks to have some promise but tracking it against Caulfield on the weekend could have been a bad day -

Race 1: Win on 1 (TAB odds at 2.10, 7.00, 10.50 for 1,2,3) * #2 placed
Race 2: Nothing (TAB 4.50, 31.80, 9.50) * #3 placed
Race 3: Nothing (TAB 5.90, 15.5, 7.6) * #1 placed
Race 4: Nothing (TAB 16.60, scr, 5.4) * #3 placed
Race 5: Nothing (TAB 31.70, 5.00, scr) *#2 placed
Race 6: Win on 1 (TAB 2.1, 7, 10.50)
Race 7: Nothing (TAB 5.20, scr, 12.50)
Race 8: Nothing (12.60,12,60, 21.10)

Even dutching on 1,2,3 and trying to recover would have made the average punter pretty nervous - and that's not even taking into account trying to actually do the maths prior to making a 'live' wager.

I'd be interested to hear peoples' views on how you might have tackled Caulfield on Saturday....

- Costanza

[Chrome Prince]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chrome Prince on 2004-03-29 16:06 ]</font>

[costanza]

Camperdown on the 28 March would have caused similar grief I think....

With wins in the 3rd and 4th race of the day, the remainder of the day was bleak.

If you were punting with a stop gap after 1-2 wins, then you'd have been fine I guess......

- Costanza

[ginger]

hi megamoos
care to shed some light on your system
cya

[ginger]

sorry to bring this up to the top but i would like megamoos to reply to some of these posts
cya

[kenchar]

It might be winter and the big moose has gone to hibernate.

[Paddy]

Hey megamoos, where's my steak knives :smile:

Sorry guys I've been flat out. I'm still collating my results and I'll try and provide my findings tonight or tomorrow.
Hi Baghwan. Its no use just looking at one race meeting for this system. Of course you are going to encounter a losing run of outs. A run of eight I believe is nothing to worry about. So far I think my longest sequence is 24. However, I'm only proposing a $3000 bank for this system. So there is a reasonable amount to fall back on. This system can of course be applied to Sydney.
If you want to look at single race meetings
such as yesterday :
Sandown Race 1 no 3 at $4.50 approx
3 no 2 at $4.60
4 no 3 at $5.50
5 no 1 at $8
7 no 2 at $10
8 no 1 at $21
Additionally at Rosehill no 1 won 4 times and no 2 once.

So far I have examined 171 races
Number 1 starts 158 - winners 29 - percentage S/R 18.3%
Number 2 starts 150 - winners 22 - percentage S/R 14.7%
Number 3 starts 157 - winners 29 - percentage S/R 18.5 %

Cheers megamoos
I'm sorry I'm not being ignorant of your interest, its just very time consuming
Paddy I'm not sure where your steak knives are mate, but I'm not too cut up about it.

Hi again. Just a note to Chrome Prince. I am targeting each number to win $50, so each three are basically independent of each other. I'm not sure about this LOT business. I don't understand that there is a loss, when I am aiming to win $50 profit on each winner. I suppose once a desired bank limit has been reached each number can be played out until it wins, leaving no losses, just a nice juicy bank buildup hopefully.

[good 4th]

Hi Meg
I have been there with what your trying to do and if your longest runout is 24, times that by three = 72 this will give you a better idea of the realistic longest run outs. Oh i here you say this will never happen.... well one day, week it will and it will bury you so bad.
If your picking numbers to win why 1,2,3 why not 5,6,7 etc.... if your lucky you might get a $1.20 winner after all those run outs and i can tell you you will need a VERY large bank, $30000 might be a good starting bank for one number.
Research it over years of data but remember that will be past results which has no bearing on what will happen on the day,just as your planning on becomming rich from this game it will come out an get you where it hurts.
Good luck hope it works
GD4TH

EVERY THING WORKS BUT NOTHING DOES

[Chrome Prince]

On 2004-04-04 10:50, megamoos wrote:
Hi again. Just a note to Chrome Prince. I am targeting each number to win $50, so each three are basically independent of each other. I'm not sure about this LOT business. I don't understand that there is a loss, when I am aiming to win $50 profit on each winner. I suppose once a desired bank limit has been reached each number can be played out until it wins, leaving no losses, just a nice juicy bank buildup hopefully.


Hi megamoos,

I'm not putting down your idea at all, the LOT means that betting $1 on every selection, applying filters etc I couldn't get it into profit using level stakes.

That doesn't mean it can't be done, only I had a hard time doing it.

If you're applying a staking plan, then proceed with caution unless you can find a way to get a level stake profit first.

Best of luck with it.

Gday good 4th. Do you really know that this is so. Numbers 5,6,7 have a much lower winning strike rate. Numbers 1,2,3 have a combined winning strike rate of over 40%.So far I've turned up this with 1000 races randomly selected from newspaper results. I think Chrome Prince provided similar results of over 40% strike rate. The point is if say 1 is winning at say 16-18%, one race in 6 and say 2 and 3 from the stats gathered so far say 12 - 13% (one in 8 races), then the $50 return is regular. So far from the time I have tested the system 171 races, 1,2 or 3 were scratched a total of 48 times
Number 1 has won 29 races
2 " 22 "
3 " 29 "
4 " 15 "
5 " 12 "
6 " 18 "
From my stats I've got so far 4,5,6 win a decent amount of time, about 9 or 10%, 1 in 10 or 11 races, which to me doesn't seem sensible to me.Numbers 1,2,3 still pay good dividends. Can anybody get any stats tables on saddlecloth winners for say the last 10 years in metro vic. I predict that you'll find that Numbers 1,2,3 would have continually maintained this sort of strike rate and be the most rgularly winning number.
I remember seeing the tables in the herald sun form and they were always winning more.Anyway I'll take a break and put my results so far to you.

Cheers megamoos

Hi again, No worries Chromey, I know what you're saying, but according to things so far I've started with a hypothetical $3000 and after 3 weeks my $50 banked lots total $4000 spot on. So I've got an effective bank of $7000.
First of all, here are some of the notable runs of winners that have come up
1-1-333-231-2121--1-1
22-2222--33-31--13-3
131--23-2
3331-3
31-2311--123
3-322-11-21
131311-1
Which I suppose actually means 62 winners in 87 races, but leaving 18 winners in the remaining 84 races. This probably explains a couple of long runs I've had, but so far the bank has easily supported it. here's a summary of the unfavourable runs so far

No Run of outs Amt chasing BankDownwith123
1 10 $306 $358
2 10 $258 $303
1 11 $413 $489
2 14 $215 $302
3 13 $297 $411
2 19 $963 $1365
3 23 $1915 $2023
1 16 $220 $279
2 24 $1714 $1793

So far the three instances that have occurred where the total owing to the bank reached 1365,2023 and 1793, the profit was 2800,3200,3750 respectively. And the inevitability of these numbers inparticular 2 and 3 coming up 1 in 8 or 9, suggests that it would be extremely unlikely that a run of outs would continue much higher than 24,thats 3 race meetings. Anyway thats the state of it so far. I would appreciate any input on this and especially any statistics on winning saddlecloth numbers.Dig out those old heralds, especially those around July,August,the end of the season.

Cheers megamoos

and a special thanks to Blazing saddles,Surround,Hyperno,Octagonal,Pharaoh and Livistona Lane, just to mention a few

[good 4th]

Hi Meg
Numbers 5.6.7.were only an example not to be taken for real, I should have stated that sorry.
Yes i have tried target betting like yourself and be very careful, dont take the longest runs to lightly, expect the worst as it will happen.
If you knew that your longest run out would be 24 or so you would be rich beyond you dreams but as its called Gambling this is where it all falls in a big heap, Nothing that i can find stays the same for to long eg; run outs,winning streaks and if the bank is not big enough you lose it just when everything is going great.

Numbers 1 to 5 win about 80% of the time
But still its hard to make profit even with
that info.
GD4TH

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: good 4th on 2004-04-05 06:34 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: good 4th on 2004-04-05 07:33 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: good 4th on 2004-04-05 08:37 ]</font>

Gday good 4th. I know that you were only providing an example. There is abig difference with the regularity of nos1,2,3 than any other numbers. Yes 24 is the longest run of outs I had so far, but it has harsly threatening the bank. I know bad things can happen. Do you have any info anybody on the longest runs of outs experienced by 1,2,3. The way I look at it, two out of these three numbers are still building the bank while the other is still losing, which keeps it ticking over. The regularity of these numbers to me would ensure that the risk is extremely low. Numbers 1,2,3 are quite often better quality horses and will win more races because of this. They certainly have an edge. I cant see any great risk when you put these things together. The bank is an effective $7000 at the moment and with $50 the aim to win, this is more than ample it seems. Any comments?

Cheers megamoos

Hi again good 4th. You say nothing stays same for long enough. Are you able to pull out any saddlecloth stats. I'm sure, without positively knowing that these winning percentages are fairly constant over time. Good 4th, I would appreciate it if you could dig up instances of any of these three numbers not winning for say 72 races, thats 9 race meetings. That doesn't seem realistic.

cheers megamoos

[good 4th]

Meg
Are you backing track to track or race to race..
Meaning Syd, mel, bris, adel,
or syd race 1,2,3,4 etc..
I dont think i realy matters but going on a race day i was backing track to track and target betting to only make $1.00 and i had the longest loosing day ever.
get on to TABQ and go back to Monday the 1st of April 2002 and check it out. I think it will shock you how many times the number one Won. There were 55 races and number one Won once and that was Oakbank race one and Benalla race three which i missed. AFter that i had no nerves left to punt and just when i regrouped myself i struck a nother bad day, man i did'nt think it could happen but there is the proof that it can and will happen...

GD4TH


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: good 4th on 2004-04-05 10:43 ]</font>

[good 4th]

Also check out the next day 2/4/2002 number one had one winner.
Im getting pains in my head re living those two days.
yeah baby......
ooohhhhhh ya

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: good 4th on 2004-04-05 10:49 ]</font>

[Shaun]

Good4th he never said he was taget betting just betting to return $50 on each horse per race eg
No---prices---bet
1----2.50-----34
2----5--------12.50
3----7.50-----8

anyone of these will return $50 plus thier stake there is no progression just race to race....and on the day you mention yes there were only a couple of number 1s that won but there were a few 2 and 3 numbers wins....i don't know if this would be a winning day or not.....if i were doing this system i would put a minimum price on any one of the selections and if any were that price i would pass the race because even getting a winner at that price will result in a low return like not takeing even money or odds on....that would be a bad move

[good 4th]

Cool Shaun,
Thats still target betting no matter which way you look at it...
Would'nt you be better just having lets say $10.00 on the nose on numbers 1,2,3 ???? If you limit your self to just return $50 I THINK your loosing in the long run as you might miss the big one that gets up and limiting your return..

[Shaun]

Yes very true but as the example shows above the 2.50 if it had won would have returned a loss but betting to prices there was a $30 profit to be made....i guess if the prices are big enough you could always put some extra on retesting his results would be the only solution

[Merriguy]

But, Shaun, he is target betting.

Look at his example of the runs of outs. If the fifty is not won in this race the bet goes onto the outlay for the next until the number wins. So in your example, if 1 wins, 2 is backed next time to win $62.50 and 3 to win $58.00. Of course, if 1 does not win, the aim for 1 is $84.00 next time --- and that is the way things can accelerate, especially if 1 (or any other number) is odds on or nearly so.

[Shaun]

i just had a shower and a think and you are right...sorry about that...he is doing the same as i do but i am backing horses from a spell to win $100 so when they win i win my $100 plus losses and i know what you mean about adding up some i am backing are comeing up to thier 4th run with no winner

Gday all.

The idea of betting to win $50 with a $3000 bank is hypothetical reasonable values that I chose. Its no use trying to worry about not having enough money on the big one Shaun. The idea is slow and steady, building it up $50 at a time. Can I put this one to you. I agree that it is possible for a freakish run of outs to happen, but highly unlikely with these numbers. You could always set a minimum odds for abet if it was too short. This is probably a really good idea. The risk might far outweigh the chances of say Lonhro or Special Harmony getting up if they were say number one in question.Wouldnt it be feasible to suggest that with 1,2,3 running in the system winning at a mininmum combined 40% of the time, wouldnt the bank be sufficient to handle this long run of outs.What do you think the chances are of any of these three numbers not winning for say even five or six race meetings.What also would be the chances of say 4,5 or even 6 odds on favourites,all say number one,all getting beaten and all this occurring at a time when the number one was experiencing a long run of outs? This is pretty slim stuff. Many of the contributing losers to a sequence lose because of their lower ability reflected in their higher odds. What are you thoughts guys. This system, with the results I have gathered so far would work equally well, if not better in Sydney. I suppose the system could be applied to just Saturday or Wedneday metro meetings, because Id reckon the handicappers grade the horses more accurately, and hence horses of greater experience and ability can and do quite often wear the number one two or three.Oh well I've left you much to comment on dudes so I think I'm off to bed.

Goodnight megamoos

[good 4th]

Hi Meg
I hear what you say that with your stats on theses numbers it might be highly unlikley to have a freak run of outs but it will happen, man trust me.
What i reckon is the time to play with real money and see how you go because doing it just on paper is and never will be the same as seeing your bank dwindle away at a fast rate especialy after eight losses or more in a row.
Mate im just trying to warn you and other punters unless you have a endless bank be warned, you are going into very dangerous waters if you cant swim against the current you WILL drown.
Play with real money, see how it goes. That is the only way..

GD4TH

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: good 4th on 2004-04-06 08:17 ]</font>

[Shaun]

If what you say is true.....avoid WFA races and set weights races because the handicapper has nothing to do with it.....

Thanks for all that good 4th, but you didnt answer any of those questions I suggested. What would be the chances?

Cheers megamoos

[costanza]

Megamoos,

I gave this system a crack 'realtime' with cash today and it worked as follows -

23 races (Geelong, Port Macquarie, Mackay)

#1 G4 M4 PM8
#2 G2 G8
#3 G1 M1 G4 PM6

The questions it raised were as follows (you haven't made it transparently clear how you would bet these beyond the paper trade) -

1. Do we only bet on races with at least 8 starters? What if there is 7 because 1,2 or 3 were scratched?

2. What if 1,2 or 3 are scratched? Do we just pass over it and try to win (using your example) $50 on the following race?

3. At the end of the day you have an open debt on at least 2 of the saddleclothes..... Do you start from scratch the following day or continue from where you left-off? (assuming the bank hasn't been hammered during the day).

4. Do we bet in sequence going from race-to-race at each of the venues on a given day (race 1 Geelong followed by Macquarie Race 1 for example), or do we just concentrate on the one track?

The other point I wanted to make is that with the time being so tight between some of the races due to those unpredictable problems that can occur on-track (resulting in race times being re-jigged), working out what to bet on 1,2 and 3 and placing the bet gets pretty stressful.

Should we pick 2 race venues such that there is enough time to do the maths and get the bets on (and to cover any potential problems on track)?

Saddlecloth #2 went 18 races before it delivered its second win today (it won in the last race in Geelong.... I thought I had balls for sticking it out). One thing that blew its value out (the size of the bets got a bit scary) was 1 or 2 races where it was favourite or second favourite but didn't win.... I haven't analysed what this might mean to the system but we need to sort it out..... What happens if you hit a race where the amount you need to cover losses and win $50 (for example) reaches a significant amount (30-40% of you bank for example) but because it is the favourite, the win odds on it are only around 2.4-3.0? I had such an experience today and it was only luck that covered me today....

What are your thoughts on this?

- Costanza

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: costanza on 2004-04-06 23:58 ]</font>

[ginger]

hi costanza
the bets you had put on would following a price guide help this system at all eg horses $5 to $15 range ?????
cya

[costanza]

hmmm..... nope, I don't think that'd work. We rely on probability to produce 1,2 or 3 within certain intervals and removing a race based on the odds offered would definitely impact the probability of your number coming up.

I know that Megamoos has said previously that he wouldn't disguard a horse in saddlecloth 1,2 or 3 even if its odds indicated that it was the dog of the field, but I did do this on at least two races yesterday where the odds obviously articulated that the horse wasn't nearly close to the quality of the rest of the field (both subsequently came towards the end of their respects field).

- Costanza

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: costanza on 2004-04-07 08:39 ]</font>

[Mark]

Not wanting to sound negative, but ......
this will send you straight to the poor house, or nut house. Any LOSS CHASING method that follows certain numbers, weights, barriers, jockeys, trainers, colours, position in betting, letters in name, words in name, last start finish, number of days since last start, or any grouping of any of the above etc ad infinitum, will not work. Unless you have a bottomless bank & a bookie who will take you on.

Hi guys. I've been thinking about things a bit and i have to agree. To be realistic I reckon that betting on the short priced horses when the bank owing is low would be okay,because the chances of the $50 would be pretty good. If say I have allocated $1000 bank for each number, then if the bank owing reaches say $500, then a limit should be put into place as a security. Maybe something like 4to1, until the saddlecloth salutes. You can also factor in how well the other two numbers are supporting the system. When I have been testing this system, I have made a healthy bank, so far its like $4500 in profit on paper. The run of outs I checked over where I have had a sequence of 19,23,24 consecutive losses, the odds of the horses I bet on were not that short either,probably 4 in the sequence. I know all of these systems that you can come up with you could do with an endless bank but having looked over a lot of race results I can see one thing. With the spread of the winners,it appears that 1 to 7 win about 75% of races. Saddlecloth numbers 1 to 3 appear to win at least 40% of races. I've been noting down sydney results too and they are very similar. To really convince myself and probably you guys too is to dig up the old tables of winning saddlecloths for the season that were in the newspaper. about the last 10 years should do the trick. These tables used to have the longest losing sequence as well. In here lies the secret
I dont think its good to bet all over the paplace. The system is being based on melbourne races or sydney races say and to have a separate bank with sydney would be the only way to go really.

hey costanza. I need to stress that I dont think this system would support just betting from race to race or venue to venue.I'm just applying one bank to Victorian races. If any of the numbers are scratched thats cool.That number is just frozen til the next race and you bet on the other two.The system runs constantly hopefully, so the bank chasing at the end of the day continues over

ooroo

[Bhagwan]

here are the stats for the winning numbers as requested.
Tab. %...longest expected run of outs
1--19.0..32
2--12.6..50+
3--13.0..50= Total top 3=44.6%SR
4--8.0..70+
5--9.6..65+
6--7.5..70+

Max expected run of outs based on 44.6%
is 12