Sorry to disappoint you TO, but Speedy spoke of strike rate, but not POT!

Since the 16th March, for $1000 liability, UK, IRE & AUS:

IN nett..$170,265
OUT......$170,000

170 wins, 134 losses = 55.92% win strike rate
Implied strike rate = 57.97%

It's actually a perfect Premium Charge minimisation scheme, that's about all. Use it to offset PC charges on some other profit making method.

Sorry RP, I thought it may have been a slow burning profitable method but obviously not.

Ha ha haaa, you don't think Speedy's going to give away anything profitable do you, it'll cruel his edge. What it is though is a good starting point. Add a few filters, like class, barrier, track cond, blah, blah....and you might have yourself a profitable system. Good luck :)

That is correct, Ocho. It does win at LS but I also use a modified Fibonacci method which accelerates the profits.
I gain a significant edge by laying off on any that lead in the run.
Shame on you, RP. I have given away almost everything I know on this site. I'm sure I'll get my 16 virgins for that. I'll pass on the virgins if I have to strap a bomb to my chest. I always thought that they were overrated.

I don't do Ireland and I have different rules for the UK. Same price range tho.

Before you dive in TO, or anyone else, as soon as I saw the word Fibonacci staking (a fancy word for chasing losses by increasing stakes), I saw the word DANGER in my mind.

First thing to consider is the 'Run of Outs'....for selections with a 55% strike rate you can expect and IT WILL happen, a run of losses of 9 at some stage.
Using standard Fibonacci, the sequence of staking is 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 36... By the time you reach your 9th out, you've already lost 90 times your starting stake and about to plonk down 57 x stake on the eventual winner! Think your nerves can handle that.....I don't think so.

I took my original data and started working it out. The biggest draw down was 33 x stake. After 100 bets, all the Fibonacci staking had done was accelerate my losses to nett -9 x stake. Not saying it won't come good, but not hanging round to find out! If I'd left it at level stakes I'd have a $163 profit. I did a spreadsheet and was going to attach it, but thought, "nah, you'll find out!" Stick to non-staking filters IMHO :)

PS: As for what region of the world this data is taken from, makes no difference, maybe a bit of difference between Harness and Gallops, that's all.

Thanks for that SB (and RP). So it is profitable at level stakes but obviously only a slow burner. I have registered only 1 bet in the last 3 days (Bendigo race 3 today which was a losing lay bet with no bets at all on Thursday or Wednesday) is that right?

I don't suppose you can hint at the UK racing different rules you have (or email me at equalthree at yahoo dot com dot au)?

Any chasing never works for me and as RP says the stakes would get pretty high.

Why did you work out the losses at even money? Very slack of you, RP, as we are talking about an ODDS ON system. Senior's moment, perhaps?

Will email TO. The method was voted best system for each of the last two years in the UK. I found a free copy on the web but it sells for about $300 now having started out much more humbly.

Speedy raises a good point (not so much about the 'senior's moment' though, that was a bit low. Still got a few years to go before I get the pension Speedy). BUT does he base his system results on Starting Price or Last matched or Last Back offer??

Sure when you look at historical results you can develop all sorts of weird and wonderful systems. TRY it live or with a bot, and see how you go? My results are based on a bot recording the Back price at the official start time. Below are the results for the last 3 days, to answer TO's request. 4 lay losers in a row. Might be a different result if you sat there 24/7 and watched live vision to get as close to the start time as you can. OR, you could always get the bot to place an SP bet into the market based on a price trigger, but SP might end up outside of the $1.50 ~ $1.95 range?

The only way you can publish results accurately is to clarify how they were recorded, historically (published by Betfair), manually or botted (if so at what time to start?). My comments on staking systems still stand though, but Speedy was using a 'modified' version, again another detail missing?