Congratulations Bert. You must be onto something very novel if Today Tonight reported on you and by all accounts gave you a good report.
However I come from the old-fashioned school. I was brought up to believe that target betting was very much a "no-no" on horse racing unless the selections make a level stakes profit. Even then it could be risky.
Maybe I'm wrong, along with everyone else. There was a time when the earth was flat and to say otherwise was heresy.
Here are my concerns. Maybe you can enlighten me.
Target betting would win at roulette if you had a big enough bank. Bet black, keep doubling up after red comes and even though you are at a 3% disadvantage when you finally hit black you will be in front.
The casinos have stopped that. That is why they have introduced table limits.
I think an analogy holds between those casino table limits, which prevent target betting from winning, and the depth of the tote markets and bookie markets.
Please correct me if I am wrong. I would love to hear otherwise.
When I watch the roulette tables there are occasions when 15 blacks or reds come in a row. To my mind that means any tipster and any win betting selection method will at times have runs of 15 losers in a row and even more. The horses being selected would probably have less than the approximate 50% chance of winning that red or black has.
My concern is that a bad run will become self fulfilling in that all the people using the information and betting bigger and bigger to recover their losses will be betting against themseleves in limited pools.
That's much like the table limit on blackjack. Please corrrect me if I'm wrong. I'd love to hear otherwise.
Wishing you all the best, Bert.
The Catparrot.

CatParrot, I asked the same question (albeit in a different way) and am also keen to hear a response other than "I've already taken it into account".

Placegetter

I for one have some difficulty in taking this gentleman seriously after having viewed his website.

Bert, I vehemently disagree with your statistics concerning favourites. You will find that it is closer to 30% than 25%.

Privateer

[ This Message was edited by: quapi on 2002-07-10 17:48 ]

Hi Catparrot
have thought of checking the old school theory against real life bets.
You would be surprised to learn about what you have missed all these years.
So many Older punters like myself have always believed what you just said , this was drummed into us by the media and supposed people in the know.
We believed them all these years without actually questioning and checking to see if it is true.
I did and I improved it and if I keep winning every day , I must be changing a lot of peoples thinking, or at least make them stop and re-evaluate all they were taught.

regards bert
regards bert

My concern is that a bad run will become self fulfilling in that all the people using the
information and betting bigger and bigger to recover their losses will be betting against themseleves in limited pools...

Put yourself in the position you describe, would you have a bet if you see that happen??

regards Bert

To give Bert his due, he does say only to back the selection if it's going to pay over $4.00 at the jump and even emphasises fixed odds would be better, therefore this scenario should not happen.

Bert,
Thank you for your reply. You have certainly started me off thinking. Maybe I'll get out of some of my set, traditional ways.
All the best.
The Catparrot.

Thank you Equine
Now you are thinking along the profit wave lenght.

regards bert