Coincidence
 

Out of interest I've looked at barrier draws to see if there's any merit in them.

The rules I used are:

1) 12 to 14 starters.
2) No odds-on races.
3) Back the inside barriers. (For example, if 13 runners we back the inside 7)

I checked the past 7 days from Wed 15 July to yesterday, I exclueded Saturday because of the better class of horses. The results are:

Wed 15 Jul
16 wins from 22 races.
Outlay of $144 for a return of $150.

Thurs 16 Jul
6 wins from 12 races.
Outlay of $78 for a retun of $48

Fri 17 Jul
11 wins from 13 races.
Outlay of $85 for a return of $120

Sun 19 Jul
17 winners from 29 selections.
Outlay of $187 for a return of $181

Mon 20 Jul
11 winners from 14 selections.
Outlay of $93 for a return of $138

Tues 21 Jul
5 winners from 9 races
Outlay of $61 for a return of $64

Wed 22 Jul
10 winners from 12 races
Outlay of $75 for a return of $99.

By my calcs there have been 76 winners from 111 races which is a strike rate of 68%. The outlay has been $723 for a return of $800 which is a POT of 10.6% - and these results are based on Unitab divvies.

If only it was this easy!!!

Take long slow breaths michaelg,,,,the nurse will be along shortly....

I hope she's a hot blonde!

Let's see how they go today...

Wyong
R3 nos. 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13.
R7 nos. 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10

Northam
R2 nos. 2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15
R3 nos. 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, 13
R4 nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 14
R5 nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 12, 14
R7 nos. 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13
R8 nos. 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14

Townsville
R3 nos. 1, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12

Morphetville
R6 nos. 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13

Bendigo
R8 nos. 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12.

11 races for an outlay of $73.

Even though I did very well yesterday with the system I think I'll leave it alone today whilst I'm in front.

There were only 5 wins from the 7 races. However, the outlay was $77 for a return was $106.

Well done Michael & thanks for sharing your findings.

I feel a few days of low divs may be its undoing long term but the SR is certainly there.

Well done.

Cheers.

Yes, Bhagwan, I think you're right, I think so far its been lucky. However I'll still privately monitor it...you never know. Pity I didn't back the method today - however, if I did they would probably then have lost.

Interestingly, when I was testing the method I discovered it had been more profitable to omit barrier no.1 and substitute it with the next barrier past the mid-point number, but decided not to proceed with it as there had only been slightly over 100 races. If I had done this today then it would have selected no.11 at Townsville race 3 which paid $55.00.

By the way, there were 11 and not 7 races today - my mistake.

I have noticed that barrier one cops a a lot of bad luck in races of this size for what ever reason.

The ones that seem to get up are the shorter priced better classed horses but even then , they cop interference, I guess they don't call it the squeeze box for nothing.

So I feel it would be safe to delete it for one of greater potential & value.

Cheers.

Thanks, Bhagwan.

I'll give it a go. From the 111 races tested I think there was only one that won from the inside barrier.

Because of the high strike rate (68%), I decided on Wednesday to apply a loss-chasing stakings plan for mainly the buzz - I had an amazing day. But to persue with it would be dangerous.

Anyway, I'll continue to monitor without barrier no.1. During the testing period there were some huge quinellas which I might now also record.

I've decided if the fave is drawn in an inside barrier then to substitute it with the lowest barrier past the half-way mark.

Out of interest, in the previous post I mentioned that the method snares some large quinellas. Today at Goulburn R2 the method snared the winner of $53.10, the quinella of $190 and the trifecta of $16,000, and also the First Four. Sadly (?) I only had it to win.

That sounds amazing.

Make it do it again .

Yes, it was a good day.

I'm retaining the original rules as it more or less works out to have the same results.

Yesterday there were 10 winners from the 14 races. The outlay was $89 and the return was $123.60 with NSW TAB divvies.

I'm only looking at the country meetings today.

Like all your systems, Michael --- interesting!

Effectively, though, w/o that Goulburn winner you would have been in the aaaa --- despite the other nine winners.

It will be interesting to see how the restricted number of fields goes today. From personal experience --- and from what has been said in this forum --- Saturdays seem hard days to turn a dollar.

Always enjoy systems like these, so simple. I half wonder if the holy grail is going to be something as simple as this lol!

Yes, its going great - so far. And applying a loss-chasing plan has had produced an ever higher profit - again, so far.

As a matter of interest, I applied the neural BP category to these same races but gave up after soon realising that it was an inaccurate lottery.

Also from testing, fields of 15-plus runners seem to have tended to favour the outside barriers, and under 12 starters has been more or less a 50/50 proposition.

I have looked at races with 15-plus runners, the only filter is to omit odds-on races, there was only one. The results (Unitab divvies) for the past 7 days backing outside barriers are:

14 races.
10 winners.
Outlay of $113
Return of $204.80.

Interesting...

Using the Ouside Barrier method I've just bagged the winner at Townsville R1. It paid $29.30 from a total bet of $8. However, I didn't bet the exotics which is a pity because it also struck the quinella of $161, the trifecta of $20,000 ($11,000 on Unitab),and the first four.

Somewhat encouraged I'll now list the selections in the other qualifying races and see how they go.

Townsville R4 nos. 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 17
Townsville R6 nos. 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15
Townsville R7 nos. 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15.
Townsville R8 nos. 2, 3, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Dombeen R5 nos. 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15
Dombeen R6 nos. 2, 5, 6, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18
Dombeen R8 nos. 1, 3, 7, 10, 14, 15, 17, 20.

Total outlay of $57.

Not the best of results.

5 winners from 8 races.
Outlay of $63
Return of $60.60 (NSW TAB)

I also backed them to Place which returned $64.30 - a very small win. I'll also monitor Place results.

Well done Michael and thanks for sharing your findings.

Cheers

I'll continue to bet and record both methods:

1) Inside barriers for 12 to 14 runners. No odds-on races.
2) Outside barriers for 15-plus runners. No odds-on races.

After a few days I'll post back here with the results.

Hey Michaelg,
Any update to this thread? Did the results continue as earlier posted, or did it have a case of the forum curse?

I guess if we never hear from you again it means you have found the holy grail :)

Thorns, with further research I've restricted the Inside Barriers Method to sprint races of a maximum distance of 1,400 metres. Unfortunately due to circumstances I haven't kept records.

Out of interest, yesterday there were 8 qualifying races - an inside barrier horse won all 8 races. There were three good divvies (Unitab):

Quirindi R6 - $14
Kalgoorlie R5 - $30
Bendigo R2 - $69.

I know I'm showing my ignorance but, can you please explain "odds on races".
I think I know what you mean, I just want to know for sure.
Its a good selection method, nice and simple, just how I like it.

Cheers,
Mike.

An odds-on race is when the fave's price is less than $2.00.

In fact, the fave in one of yesterdays's races was odds-on, so it would have been a non betting race.

By the law of averages, the inside barrier should more or less win only half these races. Maybe slightly more than half because they might be favoured in sprint races in spite of the many factors that can come into play. Maybe its just currently going through a very lucky period.

Ta, Michaelg, thats what I thought. But I've made lots of mistakes since I've taken racing seriously. to tell the truth I had more success and fun when it was just a larf.

Good luck to you,
Mike.

G,day Mike...This is worth a look for someone embarking on a punting career,It looks pretty innocuous to me,but the Mods may percieve some threat to their fiefdom.Lets hope not.
http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=1685742

Michael,

Perhaps heavy tracks should be excluded from the mix?

Also, as backing six or seven runners per race, perhaps leave any runner paying less than say, $6, out of contention?

It seems as though it is the long priced winners, which will be needed to give this idea any long term viability.

Without doing any checking, one would suggest this system cannot work. Will be pleased to be proven wrong.

That said, have noticed there are quite a few eligible races today, Tuesday.

When I was testing the system I also looked at rain affected tracks to see if there was any merit in omitting them, but over a period of time they showed an acceptable profit.

As to a minimum price - I dutch-betted the selections and they showed a slightly better result than level betting, so I decided the only limit on prices would be odds-on. In fact, I also experimented "on paper" with a loss-chasing stakings plan using dutch-betting which was even more profitable.

Were you using a divisor style plan sych as 6 point divisor?

Thorns, I was using a very simple plan "on paper". I started with a target of $100, and when there was a losing bet I added the loss to the $100 which then became the new target. The best results I had was when the fave was drawn in an outside barrier so that the outlay was not large, and when I struck a winner the return was quite pleasing.

However, at one time I used a different plan with real money. Some time ago I mentioned on this forum that one of my friends was "field betting" with his own stakings plan which he revealed to me. All I did was to vary this plan to adapt to fields of 13 and 14 runners so that I only bet 7 horses which was those drawn in the inside barriers. I stopped because this type of betting doesn't really appeal to me.

Damn, I asked that question hoping you were going to disclose this one lol
Cant fool you it seems

Unfortunately I can't reveal it, but I don't think it is anything special. But then again, he might disagree with me.

Like all loss-chasing plans it depends on snaring a large-priced winner. It seems so far that betting half the field (with an edge?) where the outlay doesn't increase too dramatically might be the way to go?