Mark,

Yours is a uniquely individual circumstance.

Had the post been about laying horses or setting markets, I would never have said it couldn't be done.

But that was not what was offered up.

What was offered was win betting on horses @ 7/1 or greater using a $4,000 or $6,000 bank providing $30,000 or $50,000 income, (depending which version you read), which I still state can't be done.

What TheEasyRun was proposing was quite the opposite to your method, unless he hasn't explained himself fully.

Great to see you back Mark and great to hear you're still kicking goals.

I don't mean to play devil's advocate here, but it sounds to me like a challenge could be a-brewin'. Start a thread with a theorectical 6K starting bank and let's see how you go over the spring.

It seems that the main knockers agree. I have used your quote Chuck because it's the shortest. No other reason mate :-)

My comments so far have only been to have a go at those who see intelligence linked to higher education [generally, only a post-war Western phenomenon]. As for the small bank to kick off with, I'm with Mark and Easyrun. If you can win you can win and the odds are in your favour that you won't kick off with a run of outs. A big bank just puts off the inevitable downfall of the mug punter who 'thinks' they can live off the punt.

Interestingly, Phil Purser is a plus $7 man too. He thinks short odds and lots of bets are for losers who can't consistently spot a few decent bets a month to jump on because their handicapping skills are hopeless.. I've been leaning that way too for awhile now too and the smaller the odds the smaller my bets. The results have been very good indeed.

I think we should let easyrun have his say, as I think there are a few here who only see what they want to see and are knocking the bloke prematurely because his ideas obviously differ to their gospel of punting. Closed minds learn nothing.

Well said Crash the post hasn't been up long and i feel Easyrun is already feeling like he/she is being choked down from getting on with it. Probably thinking whats going to happen once i post the 2nd and 3rd part. Lets loosen the reigns a bit.

Cheers
ubetido

Hi guys.

Topsy.
No I meant that Chrome cannot, meaning not with his line of thinking, only I made it personal and should not have, and apologise for getting like that on the thread.

I'm having trouble juggling my slow typing in with my time restrictions, but should have the next part up by afternoon.

Quote from original post.

1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!

This is simply an opinion dressed up as a fact.Statements like "They all" are always suspect and quite commonplace in this type of forum, where the notion of scientific proof seldom raises it's head.

Anyway, it appeals to the masses and I guess that sells the product.Little wonder old Adolf and his mates had such a ball.

I particularly like the theory,"The smart are dumb and the dumb are smart".

Wishful thinking boys.

TheEasyRun has indicated here that the posts are not a commercial and knows that the Forum Terms of Use do not permit "unpaid advertisements".

That being the case, any comments disagreeing with TheEasyRun need to be polite, not insulting as per the Forum Terms of Use.

Let's hear TheEasyRun out.

Moderator.

I'll say it again, I'm not knocking the bloke at all.

Much of what he has written is excellent.

crash, as we all have differing strategies, there's nothing wrong with $7 plus bets at all, and I never criticised those bets.

Neither did I criticize starting off small, better to start off small than get burned early with a big bank.

Mark's experience demonstrated this very well, he now lives off that initial $500 after losing $2,500.

What I did question was the flawed maths in a $6,000 bank to earn $50,000 when you are betting $7 plus shots.

Unless he is using some other method than win betting it simply cannot be done. Not only can't I do it, NOBODY else can - the numbers do not add up.

I'll leave this thread now for any further comment, as , in my opinion, it's quite irresponsible to post something like this that might lead to someone following such action in future.

TheEasyRun is quite entitled to his say, but -1 + -1 will never equal +1, win betting.

I also feel an inevitable staking plan coming on which would only lead to further comment from myself which might be misinterpreted as a personal attack, so I'll refrain from commenting on that as well.

I will be interested to see the logic behind this. How low turnover, because as you say, "a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!" from a $6,000 starting bank backing horses at $7.00+ can make $50,000 a year.

I have wracked my brains out.

The only thing I can think of at this stage that might remotely fit the bill is a selection method which is able to consistently identify horses at $7.00 plus that are in fact around TRUE even money chances, which to anyone would be like discovering a legitimate money printing press! and then combining these horses in all up bets. That way turnover could also be said to be minimised as the initial outlay could be claimed as the turnover for an all up wager such as a double or treble.

As I said, I will be interested to see the logic behind this betting method.

ooooh! isn't this exciting?.........

I believe a good handicapper can find horses at 6/1+ that are really even money chances [if they win they sure are] if that is all they are looking for. We all know that these horses win every day. Needing lots of action is the problem for most punters. Zeroing in confidently on the longer odds [only] would require a lot of discipline, hard work and days with no bets and days with one or two bet only.

It's just impossible handicap for the 6/1+ winners successfully AND have a lot of bets.

You wouldn't need too many winners to get home regularly at those odds to make pretty good money. Problem is, how many punters here would be happy with and have the discipline to only back a few bets a week, or put in the necessary handicapping leg-work?

Yep, scared him off. I don't blame him as I'm sure he has better things to do with his time than share something here after such a hostile reception. His mouth was full of boots before he [or maybe she] got it half open !

I think what perhaps confuses the short price brigade punter ['the only way to possibly win'] is the odds on offer and true odds. Odds on offer can never be more than a very rough guess, regardless if they are worked out mechanically on a computer, handicapped or the final SP by the public as closest to true odds.

True odds can only be worked out after a race by placings and beaten margins. Regardless of what happens during the race or at the start gate, the final result is the truth of the matter regarding true odds and what really was 'overs' and what was in fact, way 'unders'.

Approximately 70% of favourites lose, so that's a 2/1 chance of winning. A genuine negative expectation game chasing the shorties and regardless of how good the handicapping, the odds of getting it wrong and our money being on the wrong horse too often are quite large. Due mainly I think to what can happen in a race from the gates to the finish post.
True odds can go from odds-on to 100/1 in the blink of an eye and in less than a horse length, anywhere during a race for a multitude of reasons.

Maybe it is with this in mind, some successful punters see that 'overs' on the shorties are rarer than we like to believe and are looking very closely at the 3rd. or 4th.. to maybe the 7th favourites for more chance of genuine 'overs' among the prices those runners enjoy in a race.
Not betting them Willy nilly, but finding a few a week that have good things going for them that will be [hopefully] missed by the public and entering the starting gate with far better odds available that it deserves. If it's not missed by the public it becomes a no bet.

It might be along these lines of thought that some punters discover that the $7+ runners aren't so 'impossible' to win on after all. Very good handicapping skill and plenty of time and effort would be required of course, but I think the potential for good profits are certainly there. It's maybe all about true odds and perceived odds and boy, the public gets them wrong a lot and so do the bookies.

Before my above mistake is gleefully pointed out: "Approximately 70% of favourites lose, so that's a 2/1 chance of winning' should be 2/1 chance of losing.

"Not betting them Willy nilly, but finding a few a week that have good things going for them that will be [hopefully] missed by the public and entering the starting gate with far better odds available that it deserves. If it's not missed by the public it becomes a no bet."

Great point Crash. I am a 'value' punter myself. I'm not scared to take shorts on the right horse i.e paratroopers but generally look for the value and bet accordingly. Have to be very patient and sometimes a lot of faith in your method is required because if your backing horses @ $16 when you rate the $10, they are still only going to win approx one in ten races but because you are getting value it can be seen out and when you hit the rewards are there...

cheers
umrum

PART 2
 

Will there be a part 2 to this very interesting Thread?

Cheers.
Darky.

I think our thread starter had given us the flick darky.

Umrum,
Lately I've been concentrating on races with only one leader who has an inside [ish] alley and has a good jockey who can rate and control the pace and backmarkers in outside[ish] alleys with jockeys on board who can do what their told [get back and go to sleep until the turn] in races with more than 1 leader to set up some pace. I've been pulling some good winners in the 5/1 to 8/1 range with the odd one above that. The backmarkers drawn wide is were the best money is though.

4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.

Good heavens you guys,,does this statement really make any sense at all ????

It goes against common sense that an educated person can come up with a workable system..????? Do you all really believe that ????

"It simply cannot be done" ??????? Trash.

Yet he encourages individuals on an income of $30,000 to invest $6000 (where?)

For heavens sake.........

I've never been any of those professions you quoted [I can spell mathematician and individual though] so I wouldn't know and the guy never got half a chance to explain his reasoning did he?

lol @ this.

My suspicion is this was someone like Neil playing silly-************s, or perhaps it was an advert & the moderator & reception has scared him off.

you dont need a big bank (about $6k will do), you dont do high turnover, but still make $50k a year. yep, thats for real....

I'm very open to new ideas, new angles, new approaches.

But when someone comes along and tells me that 1 + 1 = 4, you've got to question it, and that's all I did.

No answers were forthcoming.

Throttling him straight after his first post and every post after never really gave him a chance and telling him what he was trying to say was 1 + 1 = 4 long before it could be definitely concluded by anyone he was saying any such thing, didn't really help chrome and now he has gone your putting the boot in?. What happened to the land of the fair go?

No wonder no one says much here anymore, they just tip [and not even that's safe, even when you tip before a race you can be accused of not backing your selection that comes up at big odds].

hmmmmm The form around here seems to be standing up.

I'm not putting my boot anywhere, I stated the facts, I challenged him and he produced more of the same....no answers at all.

In my opinion, fair is fair, if someone posts percentages and profits the like of which is traditionally impossible, you need to quantify it or at least cast some light on it.

Especially when it is handed out like advice.

I challenged his figures, nothing else - and I'm pretty sure that's fair enough.

I think when I posted "I feel a staking plan coming on", that's when he left.

"All you need is $6,000 to make $30,000" is irresponsible advice in my opinion.

He never came back to state why it isn't.

And for the record he was talking BACKING 7/1 SHOTS, not laying or arbing or anything else.

So the bottom line is I heard him out enough to know that backing 7/1 shots on a $6,000 bank earns $30,000 plus per annum.

I don't think I need to see any other figures to know what's wrong with this.

Still, I look forward to his replies and his other postings.

Mark,

Post40, interesting reading.....
There is a bloke on weekend radio who cannot lead punters into a profit -making strategy! He hasn't picked a winner since Julius Caesar was a boy!
Good luck to you.........!

I was very interested to read what TheEasyRun intended to post.

After all, it's not every day that someone joins the forum and from their first post offers to share a proven money making method with us all for free. So I was very curious to see what was on offer.

I hardly believe the Moderator post below could have scared off TheEasyRun, as has been posted here.

The Moderator post simply pointed out that "TheEasyRun .... knows that the Forum Terms of Use do not permit "unpaid advertisements". It also requested a fair go and concluded "Let's hear TheEasyRun out."

Okay then.

He was going to post selections and staking next and then psychology.

I keep my opinions to myself.

I just hope a visitor to this site doesn't follow his advice without reading the full story.

I also [and others I'm sure] was very interested to hear TheEasyRun out. As a new member he deserved at least that. Buckley's hope he will be back now after the jackboot treatment.

Umrum, I think you say it all there, not many individuals can think in terms of backing one winner in 10 say at an average of 12-1, which in fact is VERY good business, but not many could handle it. Not to mention the losing runs that would have to be endured with a 10% S/R ??

Chrome, if it wasn't a staking plan surely it was all ups, as I'm sure the wording was $7 to your $, which is quite different to 6-1 winners. eg. all up 4 x place getters @ say $1.65 (ave) whether on the same day or not, pays $7+ to your dollar. (sounds like a bit of "Sharp" practice there doesn't it?)

Geeeeesuss fellas, now we'll never effing know!

I, for one, was all ears (eyes?).
I figure he should have at least had a bit of time to explain himself, instead of having people jumping down his neck.

for gods sake the bloke takes a few knocks and never comes back. he posted things that many of us thought were not within the realms of possibility, we said so and so he left. his next chapter was on psychology? well geez i don't think we'll learn much there if the bloke leaves for good just because he copped a bit of criticism

It is almost criminal how a couple of days planned rest can quickly turn into the two busiest days of the month.


Selection and Staking.

Selection

Horse Racing is a sport of flesh and blood, it is not a numbers game and should not be played as such. Most that get involved in punting have a distinct respect for horse racing and horses right from the start. The training of them, the placing of horses into races, sorting out of Class, getting a grip on what is involved in obtaining odds and the amount to be bet.
It is the Basic Level at which we all started.

Following on comes much higher levels of enlightened Staking Methods, Ratings that we think we must addhere to, Systems to be nutted out and played, Sectional Times, Weight Differentals, it goes on and on until years later we are really no more wiser than when we started at that Basic Level.
And that is the level that has to be returned to.

Judgement

Class in a horse is only held in it's Fitness, and by the way that fitness is trained on or trained out. The Class differences of a horse when matched with the Class of others in it's race, in relation to where each runners Class lies on that day, in that race, and with the improvement expected in fitness on some runners mixed in with the expected decline of fitness of others, is the only Class that has to be studied.
The only way to get a true opinion of a horses Class and Fitness level is that the horse must have been Sighted and Studied in a previous race, to gauge it's Fitness and Class. You must have have a good understanding of at least one runner in a race, that you judge as being at a fitness good enough to hold his class, in the race that is being studied so you can gauge how to run off the other horses against it.
And that 'before seen' horse must be one of the runners that with expected fitness, match both the Class of the Race, and the Class of Horse that you determine one needs to be to take part at the finish of the race in direct relation to Distance.

It is from this analysis that selections are made.

One or two horses should walk out of the that Field Listing, with a couple dawdling behind them. They move to right, leaving the rest of the field behind them.
If the horse that brought you into this race is one of the first two that walked, then all well and good, but if it did not then it might come to your attention in a later race, so watch that horse with eyes not money.
If none walked out of the Field Listing, or if they came out in a bunch, then it is not a race to be punted. The one or two that did walk out are the punted horses.
Never overstudy to find bets.

The sighting of horses racing and the matching of that to Form, is the only way that true opinion can be used to make a living on punting.

Weight, Barrier Draw, Jockey or Trainer, Sectional Times, Barrier Trials, Gear, Steward Reports, Ratings, Systems, Track Conditions, ctdw and all their variations.
None of these should have a bearing on the Selection Proccess.

Has Tavette at Sandown on thursday, after an easy run followed by a lung strengthening front running run, got enough class held in her fitness, to match it with the back to back winner or the sleeping topweight.
Does she require much more time and Distance? Does any horse walk out of the Field Listing?
I do not know because I have not studied the race yet. But when I do I will deal with it swiftly and concisly. It will take five to ten minutes to accept or reject her and any other horse that does not walk out for me. If none walk or they come in a bunch the race is dismissed.

If one or two are punted, there will be a further four or five minutes of accesing the odds within twenty minuts of racetime, on how to secure return of over $7 to the dollar in Win, Parlay or Exotics. The Exotics where your strengths are greatest. In bets that it can be done, split a Bank Unit.

Over $7

That is the price you much achieve to make a living, using the soundess of Selection Methods.
What was the average price of winners last Saturday?........six point something? What will they be for wednesday thursday and next saturday?.....six point something?

It rises and falls from week to month to year but always swings back to an even keel. It does in each racing climate. The only way it changes is when drastic changes happen to the climate of racing, and that takes decades.
The game itself is throwing up a figure to attack.
I do not base the odds on this. I based them on years of recording my activities and the findings flash them up. They just coincide with what has been glaringly obvious to everyone on the punt.

Records

Everyone knows how important they are to keep. I have not kept betting records since April 2001. The only recordings I make are on horses.


Staking and Betting Bank

The talk of huge Betting Banks and the need for high turnover with slim Profit on Turnover are the cruelest words ever laid before a punter. They are junk food.
Sound Selection, sound Opinion and sound Staking are the correct food for punters. Loosing runs remain small, with the odd rare bad stretch that never extends to a point of near collapse.
A $2,000 bank of $100 units, $4,000 bank of $200. Plenty for a Starting Bank.
A Starting Bank is there to build quickly, to build into a Betting Bank. Then the Units are upped to a stage of what most refer to as each punters comfort zone.
A Bank is not meant to be built to a stage of unuseabuility. The profit must taken and the Bank stripped back down to where a comfort level rests.

Why is it that some punters think low and slow? Why? A long slow painful progression is not how you build a Bank, and low Odds are not to be accepted.

Progressive Staking

No Good. None of them. They will ruin. The only Progression that must take place is a rise of the Level Stake unit in a Betting Bank. The rise is at discrection, but only after a Bank has grown to keep in line with a warranted rise.

Each Way
No.

Place
Only in a parlay bet.

Disipline

Dogs, Trots, Poker, Casino's, Pokies, Two Up. All gambling has to stop. The only exceptions are small Tattslotto tickets and Bingo. While I dont play Tatts, I think it is just cruel to take it away from those that do. And some Bingo Halls are just the best way to wind down once in a blue moon. Laughing along with some old dears, it's a crack up.



Cutting down on needless things in punting is important to keep yourself fresh. Other hobbys and sports take a lot of compulsion away too. There are more than enough puntable races in a month that you do not have to chase anything.

Yep - No surprises there!

Crash, it's ironic that you criticise me for criticising TheEasyRun, yet you yourself are the first to stick the boot into anything that doesn't fit YOUR method of handicapping and punting.

A little even balance might go a long way.

I'm listening INTENTLY?????

Your not having a mid-life crisis are you chrome :-)) ?

Righto EasyRun, now we get the gist except for your psychology [you either have it for this game or you haven't]. I can see where your coming from except for 2 areas. You seem to understand that winning at this game is to a large degree understanding horses themselves. If you do you would also know horses are pretty one dimensional as far as race running goes. I find it a bit strange that you leave out 'pace' as being an important consideration [?].

The other point is:
Quote:"Weight, Barrier Draw, Jockey or Trainer, Sectional Times, Barrier Trials, Gear, Steward Reports, Ratings, Systems, Track Conditions, ctdw and all their variations'. End quote.
None of these should have a bearing on the Selection Process.End quote.

I agree wuth you about ratings and systems only so far they are not on any handicapping or serious money making radar of my own.

So if a horse presents for you well [having satisfied your criteria], none of the above mean anything? A 4kg. claiming apprentice [or even a 3kg.] on a mid-pacer in barrier 3 in a field of 14 runners on a small track would be a good bet would it, as long as the horse 'walks for you"?

A runner with glue-on shoes or bar plates [not that you would know as you never check] wouldn't bother you or your well protected betting roll?

I'd be interested to hear your explanation about those couple [examples] of points, because race pace, a horse's natural running style and has it got a barrier and jockey to suit [?] are all very important to this punter anyway. I certainly take notice of the trainer, track condt. to suit the runner [and the type of track: small/large] to name a few interests. Weight and time aren't out of the ballpark of my attention either.

Still, there is more than one way to skin a cat and a sharp knife would be my first choice. I'm interested to hear a further explanation of yours. Thanks for the interesting posts so far.

We are about to hear something that we havn't read a hundred times ????

Well at least he got to his point. I don't know about all this 'walking' though.

If a horse don't go for a decent canter to get the air out of it's spleen and ready it's lungs for the race before heading for the starting gates, it's their for the scenery in my opinion.

A good trainer feeds his horses well and his runners will usually be race fit, so the trainer has to be important as small trainers scrimp on feed quality, vets, etc. etc. It's no surprise their horses mostly lose.

Negative gear [gear changes] has to be important. If I see front leg wraps first time or front leg wraps again [tendon problems] the runner won't see a cent of my money. Same applies to lugging bits, cross-over nose bands, tail chains or bar plates. In fact just about any gear changes [except for trainers who always use front wraps to keep other trainers guessing], keeps my money away.

At last some sanity to this whole thing.

Agreed syllabus!

Would you mind explaining this a bit...I am not sure if you mean to "walk" and "list" in a literal sense or if this is a figure of speech?