Barny's Bottler of a System
 

1) 4th or 5th up after a spell without a win this time in.

2) We want either demonstrated improvement in each of it’s runs or simply an increase in distance regardless of how it ran. The demonstrated improvement can either be 1) through finishing closer to the winner in terms of distance beaten or 2) it’s actual finishing position or 3) being run in a better class field.

3) Work from the topweight down and back the first one to qualify – let’s settle for the handicappers choice of class horses.

NO days between runs, barriers, weight or those other things that can mess with your mind !!

Suggest you back it for two runs on the basis of encountering bad luck when it was ready to win …..

Rule number two is an absolute bottler and has been brewing away in my cranium for decades, finally released after a cab sav or ten ….. gotta go and look at boat catalogues, that’s how confident I am !!!

Fire away with any critique and I'll happily give you my warped logic on how I constructed these rules.

way to hard
 

Ithink thats way to hard for most why not just post the tips here and then time will tell if its good

Thanks for the reply job123. It takes a minute or two to find those that are 4th or 5th up without a win ..... there's not a heap of them. Once you've got them, then it's a matter of going through the form.

Instead of me posting the tips for you, I'll save you some more time and deposit the winnings in your bank account. You won't even have to go to the TAB !!!

Ha Barney can you deposit in my bank 2, will send you my details. LOL

Barny, does that come with the 'no win, no bet' special offer?

I dont think Barny needs another unpaid job.

My time means nothing, so I will deposit the money.

Just email me the account details & pin number , thank you.

I will email you from Brazil once its done.

Cheers.

Jeez, given the amount of views, I must say I'm a little surprised that no one has commented on this strategy. It is a logical strategy and I believe it utilises some of the better theories gleaned from the 'thoughts' of posters on here.

This strategy hones in on the fitness / improving angle. 4th or 5th up is one of the better filters that may indicate a horse is nearing peak fitness ..... and if it hasn't won this time in after four runs ..... and the trainer is still running it ..... then one could assume that it's fit and ready to perform at its best ?!

The races that are raffles seem to be the shorties, and this strategy doesn't really target this type of race. So that's good isn't it ?

What we're really doing here is playing the odds in a way. Say the horse has a SR of 15% Win and 25% Place ..... it's due to run at it's peak every 6 races or so.

The odds should be decent because the 'form' isn't there. You really need to be looking for this angle and to develop some expertise in this particular area ..... you're really trusting the trainer here !

stugots, just for showing interest and asking a relevant question, I'll give you 1/2 point over !

Why stop at 4 or 5?
 

Surely 6th up or 7th up would be just as good, if not stronger pointers.

where do i sign?:)

on a more serious note, to your rules I would suggest also looking for a bit market support on the horses that meet the criteria, not necessarily the fav but a bit of specking at odds can be a good sign

what you have listed is not too much different from what I do during the major carnivals each year, trying to identify those that being set for 1 or 2 races & actually have a hope of winning through improving form/fitness

I’m assuming that a horse which hasn’t won in it’s first 3 or 4 runs still has some improvement left in it and / or is being set for a certain race. Big assumption really …..

The main point I’m trying to make here is that we need to look for something / anything that may indicate the horse still has some measurable improvement left. Measurable because of the number of runs this time in that can be evaluated.

I'm keen to test this but I just have not had any time to get into the formguides in the past few days.

Quick question. How do I spot a spell in a formguide? Is it a break in racing dates of 4 weeks or more?

It's usually got a small 's' mixed up in the runs which indicates a spell.

This system has been lovingly created and purposely exclusing some of the exposed myths.

These are:

• weight (over-rated !),
• days between runs - although a case can be made for 7 days and 14 days with a couple other filters thrown in to demonstrate that the horse is in form and fit, it is statistically flawed to place more credence on less than 21 days than more than 21 days and so on.
• course and distance usually have a negative impact on POT

Barny, excellent post.

Couple of points for your comment.

(a) Perhaps consider 3, 4, and 5th runs from a spell, rather than runs 4 & 5

(b) you indicated that the shorter races are harder to assess. Maybe so, but I would run your system with maybe 1400's and 1600's only because I believe races over this become farcical in their tempo with dodgy outcomes!

(c) you said that course and distance have a negative impact on POT. Are you saying that the horse for consideration should have form at the distance and/or track.

(d) do you give any weighting to on pace runners?

Thanks for any replies

thanks peakster

Couple of points for your comment.

(a) Perhaps consider 3, 4, and 5th runs from a spell, rather than runs 4 & 5



I cannot find a logical improver 3rd up. It’s too early for any sort of pattern, no matter how subtle that pattern is I’m looking for, to say “This is the race!”

(b) you indicated that the shorter races are harder to assess. Maybe so, but I would run your system with maybe 1400's and 1600's only because I believe races over this become farcical in their tempo with dodgy outcomes!



A lot of the improvers win at longer than 1600. I see where you’re coming from, and prior to this forum, I had a 4th up system LSW that performed best at exactly 1400.

(c) you said that course and distance have a negative impact on POT. Are you saying that the horse for consideration should have form at the distance and/or track.



I like leaving out C/D because I think that the POT is reduced by more than the advantage the horse has over C/D next to it’s name.


(d) do you give any weighting to on pace runners?



I like on-pace runners but no. I want this system to look for the subtleties, those bits of information that don’t jump off the page at you. I want to “see” what the trainer is doing, and leave it up to him / her.

Thanks for any replies



The dumb bit I did put in was to give the nag a couple of runs ….. scratch that !

an example
 

I assume you are betting on this so why can you post a selection from it and explain why that selection came to be ?

Not too much time ATM. Form of 642 is self explanatory.


Form of 502 could qualify is the "0" was in a higher graded race than it's first up run. You could argue that a 12th in a field a couple of grades up from it's first up run could be an improvement from it's first up 5th ..... then it's third up run of 2nd is obvious. OK ..... so we've got a horse that's improved from it's first up run of 5th in it's next two runs ..... and has probably been MISSED by the market and all systems ..... an EDGE ?!?!

Look at the Albury Cup winner too ..... the only possible selection.

Gotta Go

its hard
 

the hard part is to know what is up or down in grade if you know why not just post these tips for everone ?

Thanks for your interest job123, but this system is not for 'everone', only those of us who like a 500% POT. Please email me at dumbrse dot knackerbags dot com dot splat and I'll give you the entrails all up for free.

email
 

Is that a real email or a joke ? The point I am making is you post a system with rules that are hard to understand---- no past results have you tried it yourself ? will not post any selections from it then claim a 500 percent profit ?????

Would Playwright not have been your selection in the Albury Gold Cup? It's formline was s643, had run over increasing distances in those 3 races leading up the Cup, and it was tab #4 as opposed to the winner #10 Paddy O'Reilly (rating of 102 compared to Paddy's 76).

S&S, No form guides to check but I did have a critcal look at the race. Paddy O'reilly was entered for the Metro races the day after the Gold Cup. From memory Paddy O'Reilly's secodn up run was in a higher grade ??

Job123, maybe this selection method is not for you. It requires some work. It encompasses some of the brighter posters logical thoughts posted on here over the years that steer you away from the myriad of systems which all seem to end up with the top 4 picks and are everyone’s favourites.



There are a couple of very good systems on here that have previously been posted, but you need to go back and have a look. These systems would seem to have had a +POT over a fair period of time. Having said that, all stats can be misleading, and some just plain wrong. I’ve found examples of that on here and I think with Malcolm Knowles racing. My selection method, like everything good is continually evolving. I’ve followed similar styles of selection in the past, but until I read the posts here extensively I was unable to make it work. I know I can make this work now. There were a couple of good winners at the weekend, but strangely one was at half the quote I thought it would be ….. I didn’t back it.

G'day Barny. Yep, Paddy was nominated and scratched from racing at Caulfield the day after the Albury Gold Cup. If you want to look up past form/results, I can recommend the racingvictoria.net.au website. I find it a pretty handy website anyway.

Here's Paddy O'Reilly's results leading into the Albury Gold Cup (excluding trials and scatchings):

4-11 CAUL
19-Mar-11 1800M Good3 (HCP) No age restriction Hcp Limit 53.0 $70,000 ($3,150) Jack Hill(a2) (3) 51.5 Rtg:77 1st WIND SHEAR 53.5: 2nd KUTCHINSKY 53.0: 1-50.25, Margin 1.9L 3rd at 800m, 4th at 400m, Betting $9/$9.50/$9. 400m attempted to shift out from behind heels but was prevented from doing so.

3-12 SANH
02-Mar-11 1800M Dead4 (0 - 82) 0 - 82 No age restriction Hcp Limit 53.0 $30,000 ($2,542) Glen Boss (1) 58.5 Rtg:77 1st BASE (NZ) 57.0: 2nd MA SHANG (NZ) 59.0: 1-51.34, Margin 1.5L 3rd at 1200m, 3rd at 800m, 2nd at 400m, Betting $17/$19/$19.

8-15 SANH
09-Feb-11 1500M Dead4 (0 - 78) 0 - 78 No age restriction Hcp Limit 53.0 $30,000 ($350) Glen Boss (3) 58.5 Rtg:77 1st GOLD SAND 55.0: 2nd SHAVILLE 55.5: 1-30.92, Margin 3.9L 2nd at 800m, 5th at 400m, Betting $18/$13/$13. reminded to ensure he rides his mounts out hands and heels to the winning post.

73 week spell.

And here's Playwright's:

3-6 M V
18-Mar-11 1600M Good3 (HCP) No age restriction Hcp Limit 54.0 $50,000 ($4,342) Kyra Yuill(a1.5) (2) 58.0 Rtg:103 1st ADOPTME TWO 52.0: 2nd ERASET 54.0: 1-36.19, Margin 1.0L 3rd at 1200m, 4th at 800m, 4th at 400m, Betting $3.80/$4.60/$4.60. unable to improve its position when held up from 400m until obtaining clear running near the 200m.

4-10 FLEM
05-Mar-11 1400M Good3 (SHAFT AVENUE LR) No age restriction Hcp Limit 53.0 $126,000 ($5,625) James Winks (8) 56.5 Rtg:103 1st LAUNAY 53.0: 2nd ORBIT EXPRESS 56.5: 1-23.28, Margin 4.5L 6th at 800m, 6th at 400m, Betting $31/$51/$51.

6-14 FLEM
19-Feb-11 1200M Dead4 (HCP) No age restriction Hcp Limit 53.0 $75,000 ($750) Jordan Mallyon(a2) (8) 56.0 Rtg:103 1st DIPLOMATIC FORCE 57.0: 2nd BELGIETTO 53.0: 1-10.90, Margin 5.3L 9th at 800m, 9th at 400m, Betting $61/$81. jumped awkwardly.

13 week spell.

Thanks Silver & Sand, I stand corrected.

Hi Barney,

You Sir, are a funny wag.

That email address made me laugh like a drain it did.

Cheers.

why not post them
 

You say it works but I have heard that before the only so show it works is to post the tips here and time will tell---- untill you do that all your post are all just a fantasy .

Have you been spoon fed all your life?

sick of bull
 

No thorns I am just sick and tired of guys who come on make a lot of crap of how good a system is and then not be prepared to post the tips to prove there point . Why bother go to the trouble of just taking his word and using his rules if this guy WILL NOT POST THE TIPS to prove his point ? I think the thats because if he did post them it would make him look like a mug punter .

job123, clearly my incoherent psychobabble masquerading as a post of substance is not for everyone. As I’ve mentioned previously I had the very great pleasure of reading almost all the posts here and I’m only too aware that some of our posters are quite partial to a tipple or seventeen …. It’s those souls who would have understood perfectly the message I was trying to convey. I hadn’t thought about directing my posts to the temperate in our society, because that’s not the circle I move in.



Back to the Bottler of a System …… It’s aimed at trying to find when a horse is about to run it’s best race this time up. Simple concept really, and takes out all those mind numbing factors for consideration such as weight, distance, CD, jockey, gear changes, track condition and so on ….. thought I’d leave that up to the trainer. So we do grab the horse at it’s absolute peak ….. is it guaranteed to win ? Certainly not !



I’m relying on the trainer to select a race where his / her horse, at it’s peak would have a decent chance. All we have to ascertain is when that horse reaches it’s peak and is ready to run the best race this time up. First up ….. we don’t have any data to evaluate. Second up ….. we only have the first up run and there one piece of data doesn’t provide a pattern. Third up ….. dunno. Fourth up ….. This is where we can pick up the subtlety of preparing a horse for a win and look for an edge. The horse may have had it’s third run on a slow track then had a 20 odd day break. I’m led to believe that this is a tactic sometimes used to get a horse fit. If we stick to fourth & fifth up we are only concentrating on identifying those horses that may be about to run the best race this preparation. This is not a selection method to pick out the class horse (whatever that is!), an up and comer, a certainty beaten last start, a value bet and so on. It’s simply to pick a horse that hasn’t won this time in ….. and is due to win ….. and is ready to run at it’s best this time in (regardless of whether it’s getting older and not racing as it once was).



So job123, thanks for pointing out my shortcomings ….. I’ll add them to drinking to much and passing gas at the most inopportune moment !

job123, your right about my post being hard to understand. I've had a crack back at you, in fun, then re-read my posts tonight and they're not too flash are they?

Like many, many others we're affected by cancer and I'm telling you and others it really does make you struggle as a family, and you just don't function as you think you do, and this is sort of a retreat, as is the punt. Absolutely don't mind anyone having a crack, love the banter, but re-reading my post, job123 has a fair point.

I'll re-write the post later on.

Aargh ... If anyone can get rid of my previous post the I'd appreciate it.

If not so be it ....

Absolute s h i t of a time ..... A lot of people go through this and most come out healthy but the journey is c r a p and most don't know what to do. Next time you see a grumpy person cut them some slack coz you just don't know what they're going through.

Those who've been through this before may not wish to relive their dark days and get stuck into assisting those who are currently suffering ..... those who haven't been through this before don't know what to do or say ..... it's lonely.

No more posts from me ..... sorry !

Barny
hold up there a second. You came. You joined. You researched. You commented. You asked questions. You participated. You started giving back in a meaningful way. GOOD GREAT THATS HOW IT SHOULD BE.
Then someone comes along, joins (I appreciate that) then demands that you give everything to him on a plate and calls you out for not obeying him. I know who should be apologizing to whom. And I will give you the heads up."IT IS NOT YOU" There is no greater gift than that of giving.
Regards Beton

just take it
 

Barny, welcome to the club!

Hey Barny, great to read your thoughts, good to see someone 'thinking outside the triangle'. Yeah 'triangle', nothing symmetrical about horse racing....

An equilateral triangle is symmetrical, isn't it? :p