Primitive but Affective System

[Bhagwan]

Heres a plan that manages to pull a number of winners.

RULES
1)We target the top 2 in the newspaper tipsters poll, the SR for all newspaper polls top 2 all have the same SR based on 2 years of research.
E.G. Weekend Australian.Herald ,Telegraph etc. (45%SR in top 2).
You could use individual tipsters but their SR will be lower & less consistant.
TABQ has a 40% SR for it`s top 2.

2)The selection is the one with the widest barrier,
that`s right!the widest barrier.

3)Must be paying $3.20+ otherwise no bet.

That`s it .

We are assuming 10 heads are better than one head ,that`s unless the other nine heads are dumber than the first head.
Then you`re no better off.

We are making the assumption all the form has been done for us & one of those 2 will get up 45% of the time over a year.
So why try & reinvent the wheel.

Works well with most staking plans.

It has some amazing days & at some very good odds because the majority of punters see wide barriers as a negative ,this generally brings their price up, especially if they show in the paper that they are running from barrier 13+.

I have seen winners that the tipster polls selected ,with barrier 22 next to their name.
Crazy stuff .
It did`nt actually start from there because of scratchings ,but many punters don`t seem to take that into account ,they just see barrier 22 therefore cant win.
That Mule payed $8.80

I`m now waiting for the psudeo intellectual form snobs ,try & rip this idea apart as pure BS.
That`s OK ,as long as they have a constructive idea to replace it with.

Punting does not have to be so serious that we forget to have some fun along the way.

[maverick1993]

Could work but chose the 10 tipsters wisely even if you use Best bets, Sportsman , Winning post and your local paper and pick the best 10.
PPm had a system where you picked 10 tipsters and only backed the horse if it was more than 10 points ahead of the nearest horse. Thats giving the tipsters selections a 3-2-1 points allocation.
Would think that the selection would'nt be all that great value wise but had a good strikerate.
But if it was running from an outside barrier maybe it would be paying alittle more.

How long have you been following this system ?

[Bhagwan]

Hi Maverick,
I`ve following this for some time .
The trick is not to bet the Mules under $3.20
Check out some past records.

I really cant see the point of anylising who the best tipster is when the research has already been done at 45% SR over 2 years .

It would be like reasearching shifting sands,
What`s great over the last 3 months may vary the next 3 mounths .
You would have to personally have to anylise the next 2 years before one has a single bet.

I`m familiar with that plan you mentioned & one would be struggling to find a $3.00 div.
It showed a loss on level stakes.
You might get 2 bets a week & usually odds on.

You may as well back everything you see in the paper priced at $1.80-$2.60 for a better result.
Still a loss on turnover ,but less of a loss.
Not worth the exercise.

[maverick1993]

I'll be watching you system selections tomorrow..
I'd use atleast 1 filter where as in some barrier postions it would be near impossible for a horse to win from the outside ..Have you seen the 1000m Start at The Gold Coast it basically starts on a long sweeping corner..I'd use selections that have atleast some sort of run towards the first corner so they can slot in..and i dont think it would affect your prices..most punters dont even look at barrier starting positions just which one they jump from..

Good Luck :smile:

[Merriguy]

Hi, Bhagwan. Enjoy your posts and the many "ideas" you put forward.

Am not too sure of the logic of what you are saying in this particular thread though. If you are looking at backing the longer priced of two horses that together have a possibility of winning of 45%, have you any certainty that the one you bet on has at least the same chance as the other :???:

Isn't it rather more accurate to say that you are backing a 22.5% chance???

Of course, I might be missing the point altogether!!

Cheers --- and thanks for the many ideas.

P.S. I nearly fell off my chair when I read in another post from you that you have some 105 systems :roll: --- or at least my little mind does.

[Bhagwan]

Hi Merriguy,
You are 100% correct .
All I`m suggesting is out of that 45% we hope to snag a % of them with tis approach .

Yes I do have 105 systems & its all worked out by my computer daily,this only 2 seconds to do the lot , one would go mental if one tried to do this manually.

[Bhagwan]

Hi Maverick
If you followed that Gold Coast meeting ,using the top 2 as shown on TABQ.
You would have struck 2 winners from the 8 races for a level stakes profit.

[ubetido]

Hi Bhagwan

A bit more restrictive but some years ago there was a method which only looked at:
Sat meetings
Weekend Australian
The top of the tipsters poll (consensus)
Must have a score of 20
If none on 20 then 19
There were some rules which i can't totally recall.
The prices were short but it had a place strike rate.
It was bet at 1 win 4 place and made a profit.
With you research tools you may be able to mould something or improve it.

regards
ubetido

[Merriguy]

Thanks for the reply, Bhagwan. Interesting.

You mentioned the returns of the Gold Coast 100 and second highest raters yesterday. I think that you have indicated in the past a LOT for backing all 100 raters? can you confirm this from your records? Thanks.

[beton]

Hi
I have been looking at these 100 point ratings for some time. Betting them all is a loss. chasing the loss is a complete no-no.There is no distinct pattern that i could see outright. Some meetings show a great strike rate whereas others are barren.

One series i did over eight weeks showed good profit in the SP up to $5 and a loss from $5 to $8.50 gaining on more than $8.50.

Six weeks later I did the exercise again for a week and blew it. There is a distinct preference to country meetings and a marginal preference to the first race.

The only way i can see persistant gains from the 100 pointers is to undergo through reseasrch then eliminate the consistant underperforming venues race types or going.

This way you may come back with say Newcastle tuesday Wednesday Thursday and Sunday on good fast or dead tracks up to 2000m average 50% win 80%place 80%POT or Gold coast any heavy going all races 90%POT and Flemington <1400m 80% LOT. It may even extend to include the barrier draws ie only barriers 1,2,&3. 6 to 12 runners only etc

This would involve a lot of effort but ultimately it could produce a set of rules specific to each course which when applied gave a winning edge to a simple selection process

Regards Beton

[maverick1993]

Hi Bagwan..i didnt get a chance to check ,,which 2 runners were those at the Gold Coast ??
Did you use it at Sandown ??

[Merriguy]

Hi, Beton. Liked your post --- but like yourself could only see a huge amount of work for an unsure outcome. Still, that in itself does not mean it would not work. I fear, however, that what may work for a certain length of time or particular course would eventually fade.

It would be a great help if we knew the way the ratings (AAP) are calculated. I guess it is some computer system.

Have you looked at the posts under "Jack's Rating System"? There is a lot of info there that is relevant to 100 raters.

[Bhagwan]

Hi Merriguy,
I note that I stated the TABQ tips as show as Radio TAB tips, not their Wt.Ratings.

If one prefers the bigger payers but reduced SR ,then target their 2nd & 3rd selection ,then bet the widest barrier of the 2 ,especially if the track is wet , as it was at Sandown on Wed 18th.

Result at Sandown targeting the 2nd & 3rd selection was 2 winners out of the 8 for dividends of $14.30 & $4.70=19.00

[Merriguy]

Oops! :oops:

Thanks for the corretion, Bhagwan.