I've been taking a 6 week trial for some system selections advertised in the press, the results so far as follows:
Wk 1 out $110 in $210.5 = + 91.4%
Wk 2 out $80 in $112 = + 40%
Wk 3 out $100 in $ 59 = - 41%
Wk 4 out $80 in $ 111.5 = + 39.4%
Wk 5 out $120 in $200 = + 66.7%
I think everyone will agree that these stats are impressive, total stakes =$590, returns $793 = PROFIT ON TURNOVER OF 34.4%, but the advertisers are claiming a profit of 196.5%, which is the sum of weekly profit added together, Einstein clone or what?

Another thing they do is fudge the win %. e.g Outlay $100, return $150, simple, POT = 50%. However, if you have only ever outlaid $20 at the most, ie your first bet was $20 and it won & you never have to dip into your own money for the rest of the day, they claim a POT of 250%, bet $20, total profit $50.
:smile:

just by way of a folow up on this one.

Final week (Sat) out $120, in $49.3 loss $70.70

Total out (6weeks)= $710, total in $743.7,
which means a POT of 4.74% better than losing, but the advertiser is claiming 'QUOTE' A running profit of 137%, just shows that we have to be VERY CAREFUL, when replying to adverts claiming a profit. But the "REAL" rouge in my opinion is the Sportsman for allowing such blatant misleading advertising.

oops sorry, mathematical error there should have read out $710 in $843, so profit of 18.73, NOT BAD, but still the preceding principle applies.

The NSW laws for advertising must have been changed? There's now a whole swag of ads for systems etc. which at one stage did not appear.
I do not believe newspapers are required to do checks on their customers' advertising claims. All that is required is the ad. meets the legal guidelines given to the paper for it to be permitted to be advertised in the paper. If newspapers had to do probity checks their cost would skyrocket.
Merry Christmas to All.