Quaddies?
 

I don't bet on quaddies but...

Looking at them in relation to the neurals using the default settings deleting the CF, TIM, DLR categories but including WT at a setting of 3:

1) All at $20 and less in the neural market,
2) All horses in each leg must have a minimum of 3 career starts,
3) Each leg of the quaddie must have 9 or more runners,

I've only been able to check the results over the past two days using Tattsbet divvies, which are:

Yesterday:

Taree
outlay of $3,584
return of $7,400

Monday

Narromine
Outlay of $2,401
Return of $5,000

Armidale
Outlay of $3,136
Return of $6,900

Total
Outlay of $9,121
Return of $19,300
Profit of $10,000

I readily accept this is only the smallest of samples and the results may have just been exceptionally good, and ready for a crash. However, the chances because of the huge amount of selections are quite high that the quaddie will be snared, and it only takes one or two good-priced winners for the quaddie to create a happy smile. Interestingly, there was only one double-priced winner in each of the above three quaddies.

I'll look at today's qualifying quaddies and report the results here when known.

The good lord will be very interested. I look forward to your results.

I use the above neural settings with only one filter to Lay the Field. I'm currently having success with it and noticed very, very few of the accidents/winners came from over $20 in the neural market. So out of interest I applied it to the quaddies because they are superior to an all-up bet due to the lower overall TAB take-out.

One way to find out...

Indeed he is. The beast awakes... Michaelg, you are fast becoming a professor of neural-ogy, I see!

Cheers LG

I made an error. The quaddie for Taree was $2,140 and not $7,400 which was the F.F. So, the results are $5,260 less than quoted, but still quite impressive.

I've also checked the all-up divvies.

Narromine
All-up $2,922
Quaddie $5,000

Armidale
All-up $5,879
Quaddie $6,900

Taree
All-up $870
Quaddie $2,140.

Total All-up $9,671
Total Quaddie $14,000

I don't know if this huge discrepancy of 50% is due to the mid-week fields, but today being Wednesday there should be higher pools and a better quality of horses.

There are a couple of problems I can think of with big outlays that will bring you undone:

1. If the divvy is small (say $200 - which it has been plenty of times).
2. You don't win at all.

Just 3 outlays from your example losing or winning very small divvy's will wipe away those profits.

As LG I think was getting at on the other thread - you need as small an outlay as possible. Even my attempts at $625 outlays (5x5x5x5) was too high I reckon.

Just some food for thought.

Agreed with The Ocho, outlay's of that size will bring you undone pretty quickly if you miss a couple of quaddie's.

I too have tried the 5x5x5x5 style of doing quaddies and it hasn't yielded anything of significance yet.

I'm also surprised that the quaddies yesterday paid so well if there was only one double figure horse in each one. I'll be interested to see how you continue to go over the coming days. From memory some of the essentials we highlighted in the quaddie thread some time ago:

- Be extremely selective with the quaddies you wish to attempt
- Look for quaddies where at least 1 leg has a false favourite that can get you some value
- Ensure at least 1-2 legs have more than 10 or so runners to increase value

I've just changed my approach to backing a bit, if I get time today might post some quaddies up, see how I go.

good luck mg

Agree as well from our time on the quaddie thread we explored many different ideas, the main thing that we all agreed on was the number of selections, you need to limit this because as you see some quaddies pay a nice price but the average are well below $1000 and you only need to miss some big ones to hurt you.

Wise words gentleman.. thank you again for your input and insights on that thread.

Has been big part of my evolution on here.

Cheers LG

PS kick in with a song if you will, sing-song-man schmiles...

Thanks for the comments, gents.

The selection system has produced a couple of large quinella and trifecta divvies, so I'm hoping it will also apply to the quaddies. I'm not betting them because laying is my go, but I will most likeley record them, just in case.

Today's quaddie selections:

Strathalbyn

1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10
1, 3, 4, 6, 10, 11, 12
Outlay of $2,401

Caulfield
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12,
1, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13, 16
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 11, 13
Outlay of $2,058

Hows abouts this one LG? (sung to the theme of 'I do like to live beside the seaside)

Oh I do like to have a go at Quadd-ies,
Oh I do like to have a little crack,
Oh I do like to take var-i-ous com-bin-a-tions,
But always seem to end up landing flat-a on my back! :D

Now for the serious business......
Caulfield
2,3
4,7
1,12
1,6,7,10,11
Cost: $40

Canterbury
3,9
1,2,3,4,7,8,9,11
6,7,8,11
2,3,4,6,9,10,11
Cost: $448

Might be time for some Bon Jovi "Shot down...in a blaze of Glory...."
Went a little skinny on the first legs.

Nice result in the first at Caulfield michaelg!!

I'm off for a G & T.

A bad start.

The method got three legs of the Strathalbyn quaddie which paid $17,000. However an all-up bet would have paid $8,724, so it's still encouraging in this aspect.

The Caulfield quaddie was won. The outlay was $2,058 and the quaddie paid $1,000, but an all-up would have paid $2,300.

I ignored Dombeen because in the first leg some of the selections had only one career start. The four legs were struck, and for the total outlay of $2,832 the quaddie paid $7,200 and an all-up would have paid $4,794.

Tomorrow I'll look at quaddies that have a minimum 9 runners in each leg.

Hi Michaelg,

What TAB dividends are you using because SuperTab paid $3228.50 for the Caulfield Quaddie and it was $2962.70 on Unitab

Thanks, Try.

I got the divvy from Unitab, but I see what I've done wrong. Immediately above Caulfield on the Unitab site is Canterbury, and their quaddie paid the $1,000.

Today's quaddies are:

Goulburn
1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9
3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13
Outlay of $2,401

Rocky
1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9
1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 13
1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
Outlay of $2,401

Geraldton
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9
3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10
Outlay of $2,744

I have omitted Kyneton because race 6 has only six starters.

Total outlay of a huge $7,546.

A disaster yesterday. I might continue with it in the hope that there's still merit. I had another good day by using the same neural settings in laying the field, so the neural accuracy (in some way) might be worthwhile.

I'm quite intrigued with the comparison of an all-up bet to the quaddie dividend and I think I might further investigate.

I like your thinking here michaelg. Worthy of a further investigation, I agree.
If we put the larger dividends aside, some interesting possibilities open up I believe.

Cheers LG

In my Lay Don Scott outsiders I omit any horse that finished sixth or better at it's last run.

I applied this last-start rule to the quaddies that have been run over the past few days. I also applied the filters that any leg that is a Maiden or where each horse has not have at least one career run then the quaddie is not bet.

The results based on Unitab divvies, and according to my reckoning are:

Mon
outlay of $4,830
return of $11,900

Tues
outlay of $600
return of $0

Wed
outlay of $6,216
return of $11,200

Thurs (yesterday)
outlay of $2,736
return of $3,500

Food for thought?

At this level, yes.

LG

haha LG think you got your bolded numbers mixed up slightly bud, that tuesday outlay would be $6 not $60 if your taking off the last 2 digits to get 1% of the quad.

Looks promising michaelg but it would take at least a month worth of quaddies for me to be even a little convinced.

Just as some food for thought and if your interested, how would they have faired if you used the same Don Scott selections but instead of filtering for last start finish, you filtered for horses that have only won greater then 4.9% in the conditions (i.e. at least once in 20 runs).

Using my own ratings i've found that winners have generally won in the conditions before and losers generally havent (and i'm toying with a system that lays tehm).

Also excluding maiden races is a MUST for any system thats using some form of ratings.

L.G and Evajbob001,

Generall, I'm not too impressed with the D.S. ratings, except for his outsiders when applying the filters.

One thing I did notice but unfortunately did not keep records, is that the selections if box-quinelled snared one or two large divvies, and the majority of the quinellas. When I get time I might have a look at this and also the Win results.

I'll list today's selections later.

Hi Michaelg,

Took a bit of a liberty and gave the 3 meetings from yesterday a couple of 'close shaves' to see what transpired i.e. to see if we can we reduce the selections in each leg to improve the yield - results below...

Gold
mg 7x7x7x7
lg1 5x5x5x6 (31%)
lg2 5x5x5x5 (26%)

Rock
mg 7x7x7x8
lg1 6x5x4x6 (30%)
lg2 3x5x4x6 (15%)

Gerry
mg 7x7x7x7
lg1 4x6x5x5 (25%)
lg2 4x6x2x5 (10%) BUT 1 winner taken out so no lolly at Gerry


Summary
Total original selections = 85
Total after lg1 applied = 62
Total after lg2 applied = 55


Not sure if this qualifies as 'food for thought' but I found it an interesting 'shaving experience' in any case. Beats the old cut throat at crack of dawn!


Cheers LG

PS Thanks TO, good pickup my son. I did note if after I posted but was testing to see if you are on the ball on a friday !

PS can also confirm that lg1 snared 8 out of 8 box quinella's on offer from your selections (lg2 missed the big one at Rocky in L1 however)

LG

Thanks, L.G. However I am uncomfortable shaving any selections at the moment.

Today's selections - I have omitted any quaddie that has an outlay of $2,000 or more.

Scone
1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10
1, 2, 3, 4, 6
1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13
1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13
Outlay of $1,960

Bendigo
3, 4, 6
2, 4, 5, 8, 9
1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14
Outlay of $840

Pakenham
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10
1, 2, 5, 8,9, 10, 12
4, 5, 6, 7
1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10
Outlay of $1,176

Bunbury
1, 2, 3, 8,
2, 5, 7
4, 7, 8
3, 4, 5, 9
Outlay of $144.

Total outlay of $4,420.

Michaelg, see above mate.

Cheers LG

I'm rushing for time to do this, and the neural website is down at the moment which is putting me behind identifying the D.S. outsiders method.

I don't know if the quaddie method would have snared yesterday's $260 quinella at Rocky R7 because the second horse (no.3) has a "D" showing at it's last start on the Unitab page, which according to the Telegraph (won at this distance at a different track). When a horse is resuming from a spell I look at it's last start, and in this case it ran sixth. I wish I could say the quinella would have been won but I don't know.

Fair enough mate. 7 out of 12 quinellas makes for fine reading no doubt.

LG

PS Neural db up and running, professor

Thanks, L.G, but I've still been having trouble with the website, must be my computer.

A correction to the Bendigo quaddie - I forgot to include no.9 in the final leg, so the outlay for Bendigo is $945 and not $840 as guoted.

As a matter of interest, five quaddie races have now been run. The quinella outlay for these five races is $62 and the current return (Unitab divvies) is $75.

See above - not wanting to steel your thunder, mate

Cheers LG

No worries, L.G.

Unfortunately the Bendigo quaddie died a bad death in the last leg. Pity because the first two legs got the double-priced winners. The quaddie paid $6,000.

Yeah I saw that.. lets see how the last in Scone gets buttered??

LG

Anyone seen Dicko? Not a popular chap i can tell you... !

LG

No, Dicko. How disappointing are you?

At least our quaddies so far are quite large. Hopefully Bunbury...

Yup... a nice set of buns to bake at Bunbury.

LG

Just throwing this out there. I read earlier in this post that the large outlay and relative returns are a posible issue.

Would it not be an option to look at this like a single selection method and not an exotic method.

When people look at exotic selection methods, the concept is small outlay for large, occasional returns. But this appears to lean towards a large outlay for frequent returns, a concept usually associated with a single selection method. People do not have an issue outlaying a percentage of bank for a single selection on favourites with filters. So if the average dividend and win percentage allow, would this not be the way to look at it.

Cheers

Doc

I forgot to mention that flexi betting allows us to do this.

Cheers

Doc

Happy to have avoided the curse.

So for a $40.40 outlay a return of 54.23 means...........

$1.34 for the win
or
$2.68 for an each way bet (to place)

Cheers

Doc