Systems on Forum
 

I will now introduce a thread to put as many systems on this forum as I can.

As the aim to put the rules of the system, please do not respond to the systems or threads.

Jockey System
 

This first system was originally posted by franga back on 22/8/2001. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Operate on Sydney and Melbourne meetings.
Rule 2: Consider the top two jockeys there.
Rule 3: Look at all the rides, you back the three horses with the highest win percentage.

Betting System
 

This system was originally posted by Cathy back on 10/9/2001. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Take the price of the favourite on the tote as soon as it comes up after the previous race.
Rule 2: If it has firmed with a minute to go and is under $4.00 for the win, back it for the place.

My Simple Favourites Plan
 

This system was originally posted by Bhagwan back on 11/12/2001. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Look at all pre-post favourites that have finished second or worse in its last start, but finished no more than 2.2 lengths behind the winner.
Rule 2: Back them each-way if paying $3.00 or more.
Rule 3: Do not back them if paying less than $3.00.
Rule 4: Do not back first-up horses.

Top Two Test
 

This system was originally posted by Bhagwan back on 10/1/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Operate on races with nine to 15 starters (inclusive).
Rule 2: Look at the top two in the tipsters' poll.
Rule 3: Halve the barrier number (maximum of five points).
Rule 4: Add this to its allocated weight (ignore apprentice claims).
Rule 5: Deduct its last-start placing.
Rule 6: Highest score is the selection.

Four-Horse Plan
 

This system was originally posted by Bhagwan back on 16/1/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Look at the top selection in the tipsters' poll.
Rule 2: Compare the top selection in race one with the top selection in race two. The selection is the one with the shorter price of the two in the newspaper.
Rule 3: Now do the same with races three/four, races five/six and races seven/eight.

G'day Glenno,
I appreciate your attempts to submit possible profit-making strategies for the uninitiated but let's face it, any mechanical betting selection method will not work in the long term. There are a multitude of selection methods which are generally devised retrospectively, meaning there is no guarantee that this pattern of winners will continue in the future.
Accordingly, the punter must give due attention to the true indication of future performance....stable support.

Cheers.

glenno
 

although i mostly agree with xanadu, keep em coming glenno, been sometime since i went thru the old threads & there is plenty of wisdom that can be applied in varied ways

Quote:

Originally Posted by xanadu G'day Glenno" I appreciate your attempts to submit possible profit-making strategies for the uninitiated but let's face it, any mechanical betting selection method will not work in the long term. There are a multitude of selection methods which are generally devised retrospectively, meaning there is no guarantee that this pattern of winners will continue in the future. Accordingly, the punter must give due attention to the true indication of future performance....stable support. Cheers.

plus



I agree with those comments, but please put them elsewhere.

Dutch betting three horses per race plan
 

This first system was originally posted by Bhagwan back on 15/2/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Conscentrate on the TAB first, third and fourth favourites two minutes before jump. (Ignore the second favourite.)
Rule 2: Always treat the favourite as $4.00,even if its paying less than that.
Rule 3: The race must have at least one runner paying $6.00 or more out of the first, second or third favourites, otherwise no bet.
Rule 4: You now dutch the bet by dividing the horses price on the TAB screen into your take-out figure.

Suggestion
 

Glenno,
May I suggest on each system you have posted to include the URL of the originating thread ?
This would benefit an option if readers might prefer to read the entire debate on a particular archived post.

That's a good idea.

http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=75

http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=112

http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=325

http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=400


http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=427

http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=492

excuse my encouragement, woops now i wasnt sposed to put that here, was i.....

That's okay, though I will still implement the URL addresses for the systems in the future.

Xanadu writes
""I appreciate your attempts to submit possible profit-making strategies for the uninitiated but let's face it, any mechanical betting selection method will not work in the long term. There are a multitude of selection methods which are generally devised retrospectively, meaning there is no guarantee that this pattern of winners will continue in the future.
Accordingly, the punter must give due attention to the true indication of future performance....stable support."'
____________________________________________
Stable support can be a factor, I guess, but Ive never been in a position to identify it and use it well.

How does the ordinary punter know if a short price, or a shortening price is due to stable support and not other factors? I know some people make it thier own business to get on side with particular stables with their ear to the ground, but I cannot imagine that the stable always knows when their horse is going to beat every other horse in a particular race.

Same goes for jockeys. They might know their own horse well, but do they have an unbiased and complete knowledge of their horses's competitors?

Another factor to consider is that I maintain that the stable doesnt always know the true winning chance of their horses. Lee Freedman was one trainer who appeared to me to do a lot of form assessement, and I suspect more trainers are heavily into that now than in days gone by, but as I mentioned elsewhere, some horses appear to win with little , if any ,stable support whatsoever.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

""any mechanical betting selection method will not work in the long term. There are a multitude of selection methods which are generally devised retrospectively, meaning there is no guarantee that this pattern of winners will continue in the future"

Many a mechanical system is created retrospectively and Yes that in itself is is no guarrantee that the trend will continue, however the more selections this has been tested on prior, surely the better the chances of it being a success?

There are some factors that dont seem to change much over the years. favourites, I imagine, are still winning approx 30% of all races?

I'd like to know what todays cummulative updated winning percentages are for last start winners :in Melb, Syd ,Bris and Adeleaide,

:and also winners which were last start winners in the past 7 days or less, 14 days or less , and 21 days or less.

Anyone here know what those percentages are are today and what they were say 10 years ago? ...Perhaps this is all listed on a website somewhere..

There used to be publications avail in australia that would produce these
tables but living overseas means that I know longer have this info at my finger tips

I like the word "filter'" that is used on this forum to describe a refinement of selections, and I am still an advocate of applying mechanical filters to ratings services selections. The trick, I guess, is to use a ratings service that genuinely does its own form and is not swayed by its competitors' selections.

Back in the mid 80's when I bought an existing ratings service and retained the handicapper, I learned much about racing services. The handicapper was able to show me how some ratings services would play games and withold their final ratings and assesed odds until after their competitors had posted. Within the group of ratings services operating at that time, some would would freely exchange their race codes with their opposition, each service closely monitoring each others ratings.

I am sure there is a place for mechanics, esp when applied to consistent ratings services selections. Ive proved that to myself over the years. It took me awhile to adopt that concept..use relaible ratings as a basis for selection and then apply rigid mechanical criteria to come up with a selection and then further apply additional filters, and then backing that horse as many times as it comes up in a filtered plan....ie, each filter being a stand alone plan in itself.


The end result is a portfolio of identical plans for each chosen rating service., and you have the possibility of a horse coming up in several portfolio plans for one particaulr ratings service, but not necessarily that same horse coming up in a different ratings service plans. What I found is that the ratings service does not have to be brilliant, nor show consistent profits or performance in say the Punters Choice assessment tables. This is because I am not betting all of their selections, and staying away from the short priced selections. The main thing I looked for was their ability to rate horses that were double overlays at 8-1 or better in their top three.

Running three services gave me more bets and a better spread of risk.

The Double overlay approach seemed to have got hammered over the years, and I mentioned elsewhere the decline in average winning prices of my bets in Melbourne.

Today, I dont actually use the double overlay method in the same way that i used to. I just select from the top 3 rated horses of the chosen ratings service and then only decide to back them if they are 8-1 or better when the win pool hits the 10 k mark. This is not as accurate as I would like, because I should really be converting the ratings numbers into prices and then looking for double overlays at 8-1 or better if I was to follow the exact path of days gone by..

Some of my selections end up shortening considerably in price over the course of the day so I often end up with winners lat less than 9.00. I prefer this selection method because my initial selections are not starting out as fancied horses or false favourites, and therefore not connected in any way to the considerable media and bookmaker hype that performs its predictable farce.

When in Oz, I used the Australian newspaper market prices as a filter to nab "double overlays" from the ratings services selections and assessed prices. I also used to use the Computercard tables as a filter. I am not saying that either the overnight market prices nor computercard tables were all that marvelous but they formed a constant of mechanical refinement and it produced consistent results over the six years that I backed them with real money and discipline. There is no doubt that by going to the track and securing the best prices, I helped my P.o.t enormously.


Much of what I did ,and do today, may not make much sense. To me it still seems risky to base multiple plans upon a main raw plan...because of the fact that if the raw selections dont win, the refined ones cannot possibly produce a winner either.What those refined plans do, however, is usually capitalise on those winning raw selections. i dont place any staking plan or bet according to price.

Does anyone else operate a portfolio like this..ie. betting a selection according to the number of filters it survives? I would be interested to know.

below is an example:


plan 1. Q
the raw selection..the single selection qualifier is any ratings service rated race after considering their top three ratings in a race, after scratchings, and applying filtering such as no first or 2nd up from a spell, and only one qualifier in in any race.

plan 2 QLSW where the raw selection (Q) is also a Last Start Winner

plan 3 TRQ the raw selection (Q) is also Top Rated by the rating service

plan 4 QNR
the raw selection (Q) which also is Not Rated in the first 4 by the nswtab.com.au tipster

plan 5 QLSWNR
the raw selection (Q) which is also a Last Start Winner and Not Rated

plan 6 TRQLSW

selection which is last start winner and top rated

plan 7 TRQNRLSW
the raw selection which also is Top Rated , Last Start Winner and Not Rated in the first 4 selections on nswtab.com.au

__________________________________________________ ______________


I am also monitoring how many of my winners are not tipped as a " Late Mail" selection on nswtab.com.au. It seems that the late mail co-inciding selections are not faring too well at all, but I dont have enough form history to know for sure.

I am also recording previous winning percentages of each selected horse and their ability on course, distance and track condition, but doubt that I will ever use any of those factors as further filters. In many respects these factors should already have been well taken into account when the ratings service did its initial work.

I invite your ideas and comments

Cheers
Steve

This system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=588 was originally posted by Bhagwan on 29/3/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Operate on races with 12 or more runners.
Rule 2: Using the Wizard formguide, consider those horses on the bottom five places in their poll.
Rule 3: Back all that are paying $6.00 or more before the jump.

Prize Money Plan
 

This system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=588 was originally posted by Bhagwan on 29/3/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Operate on races where every horse has had eight or more starts.
Rule 2: Consider those horses on the top four in tha average prizemoney.
Rule 3: Of those horses in the top four average prizemoney, back the horse with the highest win/place percentage (back the selection each way).

Bhagwan's place selection and staking plan
 

This system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=682, was originally posted by Bhagwan on 22/4/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Selection plan
Rule 1: Operate on races with eight to 12 runners inclusive.
Rule 2: Consider only horses who are sole 100-pointers in the race on UniTAB ratings (http://www.tabonline.com.au). No bet if more than one horse are 100-pointers.
Rule 3: Must be paying $3.00 or more for the win.

Staking plan
Rule 1: Back the final selections for the place.
Rule 2: The first bet is one unit.
Rule 3: If the selections is unplaced, the next bet is the same as the previous bet.
Rule 3: If the selection places, increase the next bet by one unit unless there is a profit in the series.
Rule 4: If there is a profit in the current series, then start a new betting series.

The recommended starting bank is 150 times the starting bet.

Comments
 

If you have a comment on a system, please do so at either the URL thread for the system or on http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=9935.

Top Three TAB Favourites Plan
 

This system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=873, was originally posted by Bhagwan on 1/6/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1: Consider only the first three TAB favourites two minutes before the jump, as shown on the Teletext screen.
Rule 2: Selection is the middle barrier of the three.
Rule 3: Back it each way, but only if it is paying $3.30 or more for the win. Otherwise, no bet for the race.

Apart from profit, what is missing from every single last one of these systems?

Xanadu's quoted comments above deserve to be engraved upon the punters shrine - you know, that unspoken place of gnashing teeth where every mug punter finally goes to rest beaten, bruised and eternally broke.

Ripper of a System
 

This system is located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1006. The rules are as follows:


Rule 1: Operate on all flat races where every horse has had at least five starts.
Rule 2: Calculate the "win conversion factor" for each horse by diving the number of wins by the number of places (including wins).
Rule 3: The horse with the highest ratio is the selection provided it meets the following criteria:
Rule 3a: Minimum win conversion factor of 0.4.
Rule 3b: Career win/place percentage of 45% or more.
Rule 3c: Finished in top six last start and within 4.5 lengths of the leader.

Whooooooah!!! Dr Pangloss,

Take a Bex, have a cup of tea and a good lie down....don't get your "knickers" in a knot.
"Me thinks ye protesteth too much..."
Very entertaining though.
I haven't replied since you posted as I only noticed it today.
You've given me a great deal of mirth.

from one plod to another
 

Thats what I needed, a powdered Bex or two.

Now that my head is clear and the pulse rate down to normal what did you think of our friend's PBent publication? Just thinking of silly stupid backfitting systems gets me me me me me ..........time for another Bex.

'Apart from profit, what is missing from every single last one of these systems?'

I guess the answer to that is long term profit being number 1 reason as mentioned.

No. 2, and this is the biggy, being the total lack of any systems ability to 'reason'.

Possible success for any system is adding reason to it's selections but then it's no longer a purely mechanical system.

Systems are a great way for new punters to enter the fray without too much damage but the end goal is to be able to 'do the form'. Only then has a punter any hope of being able to eventually [and only in rare cases if your good enough] make small % profits.

Crash trash.
 

Hi crash: hope you don't mind the header, I just couldn't help myself.

Just wanted to say I don't agree on your opinion of systems in general. I was a total failure at form assessment and over the long term never managed to show a profit. I now have daily reliable profit using a system so simple it beggars belief.

Just because the systems you may have experienced didn't pan out doesn't mean all systems are shyte. The trick is in finding which variables matter at what time.

TWOBETS
 

keep it close to your chest twobets, lest the forum curse has its evil way with you!

'Hi crash: hope you don't mind the header, I just couldn't help myself.'

Hi 2 bets, no I don't mind. Heck, with only 13 post on the board I'd be being uncivil to take offense from a newbie. I don't even mind if you disagree with my opinion on systems either but tell me something, after which one of your 2 bets did you decide your system was a long term winner ? [sorry, I couldn't help myself] 8-)

Crash
 

Ouche!

The 5-6-7-8 System
 

This system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=862, was created by Numerator on 31/5/2002. The rules are as follows:

Rule 1: Operate on Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane meetings.
Rule 2: Only look at TAB numbers 5, 6, 7 and 8 after morning scratchings.
Rule 3a: The BACKER UPPERS selection is any of these horses whose latest race was 5, 6, 7 or 8 days ago. It must be the only BACKER UPPERS qualifier amongst those numbers in the race.
Rule 3b: The HI STRIKERS selection is any of the horses whose win/place percentage for all its starts is 56.78 percent or more from at least 5 life starts. It must be the only HI STRIKERS qualifier amongst those numbers in the race.
Rule 3c: Any final selections from the above 2 systems that are qualify for both BACKER UPPERS and HI STRIKERS qualify as STUNNERS and are backed for triple the normal bet.

I'm repeating this because of recent comments on this thread.

This system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1058, was originally posted by Reenster back on 28/6/2002. The rules of the system are as follows:

Rule 1:Operate on Saturday Class (over $40,000) races only.
Rule 2: Eliminate 2YO and 3YO races.
Rule 3: Do not operate on set-weight or weight-for-age races.
Rule 4: Take the minimum weight (ignoring apprentice claims) and add 3.5kg. This is called the midweight.
Rule 5: Add 1.5kg to and subtract 1.5kg from the midweight. This 3kg range is called the weight range. Selections must fall within the weight range.
Rule 6: Look at the last three starts of each runner in the weight range.
Qualifiers are runners whose last three starts add up to 11 or less (spells count as 10).
Rule 7: Look at the last two starts of each qualifier. Runners whose last two starts add up to 4 or less are the selections.
Rule 8: If more than one selection in a race, back both if at least 2/1 can be obtained. Otherwise back the runner at the longer odds.

Reenster comments: "The idea seems to be to catch in-form runners that the handicapper has missed or under handicapped.

"Other filters such as wet track ability (especially in Melbourne) could be used to modify selections."

The system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1009, was created by dolly007 on 20/6/2005. The systems is as follows:

Rule 1: If the horse is selected as the 1, 2 or 3 most favoured by the newspaper opinion pollsters, then give the horse one point.
Rule 2:If the horse's TAB number is between number one and up to and including number six , then give the horse one point.
Rule 3: If the horse is in the top four shortest price horses give it one point.
Rule 4: If the horse finished in the first four in its previous start, then give the horse one point.
Rule 5: If the horse's last start was no more than 21 days ago, then give the horse one point.
Rule 6: If the horse's barrier position is between 1 and 12, then give the horse one point.
Rule 7: If the horse has won at least one of its last three starts in the same city at a major metropoltian track, then give the horse one point.
Rule 8: If the horse has either one of the top three jockeys riding it or is trained by one of the top three trainers, then give the horse one point.
Rule 9: If the horse is 4kg or heaiver than the lowest weighted horse, then give the horse one point.
Rule 10: If the horse is aged between two years and five years (inclusive), then give the horse one point.

dolly007 comments: "If your selection receives seven or more points out of the ten, then statistically your selected horse has a much better chnace than average of winning and you can therefore back it whith added confidence."

The system was created on 20/6/2002.

The 2nd and 3rd Favourite Selection Plan
 

The system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1155, was created by Bhagwan on 11/7/2005.

Rule 1: Look at the second and third favourites on the Teletext TAB market movers three minutes before jump.

Rule 2: The selection is the one with the best last 2 starts once you add them together. (We dont give a figure to the resuming shown, just go back to an actual run. If one horse has had one career run and the other has had two or more, we always back the more experienced runner.)

That was incorrect. The correction was it was created on 11/7/2002.

The system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1353, was created by enjay on 9/8/2002.

Rule 1: Consider only the top jockey on premiership table in each state.
Rule 2: Of the rides, consider only those whose last start was within 28 days.
Rule 3: The single bet is the ride with highest win percentage for that meeting.

Free trifecta method
 

The system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1424, was created by kiwigal on 19/8/2002. The rules are as follows:

Rule One
Ø Any horse that has won its last race and is running within ten days of its last race is given 40 points.
Ø Any horse that has placed second in its last race and is running within ten days of its last race is given 20 points.
Ø Any horse that has placed third in its last race and is running within ten days of its last race is given 10 points.

Rule Two
Ø Any horse that is running the exact same distance as its last start gets 10 points.
Ø Any horse that has won or placed in its last race running the exact same distance as this race gets 20 points.

Rule Three
Ø Any horse carrying the same weight as its last race gets 20 points.
Ø Any horse carrying less weight in this race compared to what it carried at its last start gets 30 points.

Rule Four
Ø Any horse with a dividend of $3 or less gets 40 points.
Ø Any horse with a dividend of $6 or less gets 20 points.
Ø Any horse with a dividend of $8 or more gets 5 points.

Rule Five
Ø Any horse that ran at a city race in its last start gets 50 points.
Ø Any horse that ran at a track other then a city race in its last start gets 20 points.

Points are awarded to horses using a selection criteria and the animal with the highest number of points qualifies as the best selection of the race.

CR2000 rating system
 

The system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1281, was created by hermes on 24/8/2002. The rules are as follows:

Rule 1: Find the runner with the highest QTAB rating among those TAB numbers lower than the number of the favourite. Bet $4 to win.
Rule 2: Find the runner with the highest QTAB rating among those TAB numbers higher than the number of the favourite. Bet $3 to win.
Rule 3: Where the favourite is TAB number one, take the two highest QTAB ratings in the field (but not the favourite). Bet $4 on the lower TAB number, $3 on the higher.

The Sensational Bad Horse System
 

The system, located at http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=1421, was created by Bhagwan on 18/8/2002. The rules are as follows:

Rule 1: We coscentrate on TAB numbers 2 to 7 (inclusive). We do not replace any that maybe scratched.
Rule 2: We bet on only those horses that finished fourth or worse last start. (There will usually be more than one horse per race.)
Rule 3: Delete any that are resuming or any having their first carrer start.
Rule 4: Staking Method: TAB numbers 2-3, bet $4.00 win; TAB numbers 4-5, bet $3.00 win; TAB numbers 6-7, bet $2.00 win.