OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums

OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/index.php)

- Horse Race Betting Systems (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/forumdisplay.php?f=10)

- - Time to move on (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=11799)

Agreed, agreed Dr. Ron.
Like I said: 'I've succeeded very, very well in achieving my last point'.

Hi sixgoalhero

I never actually bet any money on that system because all the work needs to be done before i go to work. I leave pretty early in the morning so i didnt get much time. To come up with those results i would check the paper when i got home and work it out from there

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrome Prince

"It's not just about picking winners, the most obvious horse will most probably be the least value. There is value in every race, you just have to look for it. The most favoured in the tipsters poll, the most popular jockey, the best stable, the highest strike rate, the best form, the highest class, the shortest price, will all lead you to a high strike rate, but a loss - UNLESS you find within all of that something that the public is generally not aware of - AN EDGE."

I almost agree with that except you missed a very important element. That is that factors are influenced by many things, and these factors ebb and flow with time. Some factors go out of existence and new ones come in to being, thus your system needs to be CONSTANTLY reviewed and tweaked to emulate the changing nature of the factors that govern it.

If you are really clever, you might even try to predict the course of some factors and beat others to the punch

Cheers
Tailwag

I know not what you mean. How about some examples of factors that change with time.

KV

Quote:

Originally Posted by KennyVictor

I know not what you mean. How about some examples of factors that change with time.

KV

I'm referring to real world trends, like the influence of TV, Betting Exchanges and so forth. As these things come into being, they exert a certain influence on the existing state, thus changing it forever more :-)

Oh yeah, stop sucking me in, we/I know you know what I mean :-)

Tailwag

We now have the TAB in pubs, betting exchanges, PC's to download endless facts for handicapping and systems, you name it we have it. Agreed. But the racing ?

The % of favorites winning hasn't changed and although we have changed and the hype has changed and our perceptions [and expectations] of the game have changed, the horse is still a horse with a jockey on it's back. They are still racing against each other and the fastest one to the post wins. What's changed as far as the racing itself is concerned except the amount of it?

Metres have replaced furlongs ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by crash

We now have the TAB in pubs, betting exchanges, PC's to download endless facts for handicapping and systems, you name it we have it. Agreed. But the racing ?

The % of favourites winning hasn't changed and although we have changed and the hype has changed and our perceptions [and expectations] of the game have changed, the horse is still a horse with a jockey on it's back. They are still racing against each other and the fastest one to the post wins. What's changed as far as the racing itself is concerned except the amount of it?

Metres have replaced furlongs ?

The basic essence of racing has changed. Let me explain, in the beginning there were hobby trainers who walked there horses to the track....blah, blah, blah, and today we have artificial insemination, etc. and thus I rest my case.

I don't have several hours right now to explain the many many ways in which basic horse racing has changed, but you are right that we measure it over an agreed distance, and the first to pass the end point is declared the winner. However that is a far cry from the essence of horse racing then to know.

Just to give you a quick example why your assertion is inaccurate. Have you ever heard a trainer put a stayer into a sprint race on returning from a spell, saying the horse may sprint well fresh, but we are really aiming him at a later race over more ground?

Well, of course, this statement is a declaration that we are not really interested in winning this race, we would take it if we could, but we are just using it as a stepping stone. In this instance, they are not cheating (per se) but they are not overly trying either are they?

You might argue that they did this in the past, and yes they may have, but it is a normal training pattern these days, where trainers map out years at a time for their charges, and work to that game plan barring injury.

The whole racing scene has changed, not in terms of the winner being declared given a set of circumstances that are met i.e. a race, but in a million other subtle ways which evolution has brought us to.

I really want to give a better answer than this, but I have to run. Cheers.

Tailwag

Off the top of me head a couple of things that have changed are...

The amount of racing,Crash you mentioned something on this forum about the amount of week class 3 type races now on metro cards.

I bet the introduction of those races have thrown a spanner in the works of a few systems.

One other thing i think has and is continuing to change is training styles,ever since Vintage Crop won the cup more and more trainers are waking up to the fact that all their horses arent the same and they need individual preperations,that could include racing a horse fresh every single time it races,a punter who blindly follows the 21 days since last start rule will be missing more winners.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwaz

Hi all,

I've spent the last 4 years following the horses seriously, spending countless amounts of hours on the computer and filling about 30 excercise books full of systems. Althogh it was fun i just dont have the time to do it anymore. Over the years i've come up with a few systems that have been quite successful so i'm going to put them on this thread. Here goes.

SYSTEM 1

Grab the morning paper and circle all favs for any race/meeting. From these selections only consider the horses that have a jockey or trainer that has made the top 100 list on racenet.com.au. With the selections you have now you need to compare their barrier postion they had in their last race to the barrier they have in today's race(i use ozeform.com.au). You now need to do the same thing with their weight. Add the two differences together then add the position of their last race.

For eg.

Barrier weight Last position
Last race- 2/11/2005 4 56.5 2/10

Todays race 5 56.5

Difference 1 + 0 + 2 = 3

Your selection will be the horse that has the lowest score under 5

This system works well with place selections. I followed it for about 10 weeks and from 60 selections there was 51 place getters. Ave div was between
$1.5 - $2.

SYSTEM 2

I followed Mark Reids hot tips for about 3 months and although they weren't very consistant he did have a bit of success with horses that were first race back from a spell. The above Barrier, weight, position system works very well with his selections. In 3 months their was only 7 selections but all 7 came in winners so it's worth a look at.

SYSTEM 3

This system works well with midweek races. Big juicy odd's are quite common with this one.

The rules are simple, Only consider horses that have raced in a Group 1,2 or 3
in at least one of it's last four races and is the only horse in the field to have done so. With the right filters it could work a lot better but odd's up to $15 are common.

These systems do need a bit of patience but can be rewarding. Best of luck

Cheers, Bigwaz

I take it you are not leaving to be a salesman. That is possibly the worst sales pitch I have ever heard.
Here are some winning systems. I do not need them anymore because I am quitting the punt.

Glad you are not asking for money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigwaz
Hi all,

I've spent the last 4 years following the horses seriously, spending countless amounts of hours on the computer and filling about 30 exercise books full of systems. Although it was fun I just don't have the time to do it anymore. Over the years I've come up with a few systems that have been quite successful so I'm going to put them on this thread. Here goes.

SYSTEM 1{snip****
SYSTEM 2{snip****
SYSTEM 3{snip****

These systems do need a bit of patience but can be rewarding. Best of luck

Cheers, Bigwaz

Firstly I respect the work (time) you have put in and thank you for sharing three of your systems with us. I can't help noticing that all three systems have a common element to them, and as I am a student of systems and have a belief that the ultimate system will only exist for a brief time due to the dynamic (changing) nature of the racing industry itself, which I have voiced several times on different threads, I am interested in pointing out to you the narrow scope of your systems.

The first and most obvious point that comes out of the (specifically the first two) is that you are using someone else's selections. Nothing wrong in that, I don't like reinventing the wheel any more than anyone else, and I am a big believer in reusable code. However the point is made that your system is dependant on selections and does not in itself create selections. Your third system does via criteria create selections if they exist.

What your three systems (I understand you have many more) do not do is step outside the narrow corridor you have set yourself up with. Is it because you don't have the time or the inclination that you don't create a system that evaluates every runner in every race? Their is value in every race, as has probably been said an infinite number of times, finding the winner is not the vital factor in that equation.

I have noticed since I arrived on this forum some two months ago that most published systems are dependant on a static state and a narrow set of conditions that must be met. By definition, if nothing else, what these systems do is reduce the possibility of value, and I am not so sure that wealth preservation is maintained abnormally highly to compensate for the skinny number of times most systems actually yield a betting proposition.

By way of an alternative I offer the dynamic state such as the volume of money being wagered at any given point prior to a race, to my mind this is almost obscene not to be taken into account in one's selection process. This of course implies that I factor a higher priority to dynamic influences than static (historical) influences. However saying that in track parlance, I would rather follow the money than trust the ************s tipping for the newspapers :-)

I recall another thread on this forum that discussed the difference between perceived 'smart' money and just money and to me, I believe that you can design filters that will match patterns that show the difference by and large.

Regardless of the 'quality' of the money, I can't understand why a system wouldn't want to incorporate that dynamic state into whatever other factors go into the system. To take that a little further, I can't fathom why when constructing a system, you wouldn't want to harness every single bit of information available to you. To my mind, it all goes into the mix to make up what racing is really all about, and might help.

I guess I am a chaos theorist rather than a simple devotee, in racing systems, keeping it simple might just equate to keeping you broke. These are just my thoughts in between races, as I sit at my desk :-)

Please don't flame me, I am a simple and fragile type!

Tailwag
(Woof)