awhile back i copped some flack on here for suggesting that systems work but system users dont.
the point i was making is that theoretically systems work and there is some wishful thinking in us that would like to think that mathematically they should work and that there must be a way of achieving a profit.
the problem is that the degree of difficulty in following a system is huge for several reasons.
one is that it is a tremendous committment of time and money.
two. it is extreme discipline.
three. the outcomes are unproven so we are launching into an unknown path.
four. there are so many variables involved that the wins may be co-incidence rather than evolving of a systematic selection.
five. the strike rates are usually at the margin of profitability to such a degree using the mathematicians law of large numbers the losses may be equal to what the game says you should lose.
this means that it is not really a system at all.
disciplined systems can be worked out by anyone.
i knew a guy once who backed only horses that had won course and distance. i recall him getting a $124 winner once.
but its a system.

Hi Topsy,
I agree with you it is usually the human
element that lets down.
As I posted a while ago I had a system using the martingale(Build up)staking plan.
My son used it for two years and never went bust,lots of hairy times of course,BUT the point Im making is If I had not been with him he would have lost his nerve many times and come out losing.
This system ran from meeting to meeting and never ended.
The classic example was Randwick one day and he was on I think about his 8th bet from the previous meeting.I still remember the horses name BRAVERY,5/1 prepost first starter.80/1 with the books.
He just didnt want to back it. I made him do it telling him the horse doesnt know his price and whoever did the prepost thought it was a 5/1 shot.
Old story last on the bend won by a length going away.
If what you are doing has some reasonable basis stick to it.
It is ALWAYS the human element that lets down.
Cheers