 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
#1
24th December 2011, 04:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Betting systems discussion
I’ll start this thread with the intention of playing devils advocate regarding systems and hopefully offering to some the opportunity to explore a different mindset in the way you approach your punting. Most of my “ephinanies” will come from, but not restricted to information gained from this site, and others, my punting experience, analysis of years and years worth of Herald Sun form guides, The Sportsman, as a “penciller” for “cough, cough, some 30 odd years ago, a hanger on with the trainer of a champion greyhound, a stats guy, and an all round mug.
As punting is an evolutionary pursuit, there’s no point bringing up any of my past posts, in or out of context, as this may stifle any conversation. I’m more than happy to run this myself without any contributors. Let me begin by bagging 99.9% of system posted on here because they contain too many rules, have been backfitted for a short period of time to show a profit, they follow current trends, they rely on flawed and unsubstantiated data ….. and if this doesn’t get me booted off, WITHOUT DOUBT there will be some here who will try to make a short term profit by “convincing the unwashed” there’s money to be made by following “this system”. Best advice ever is ….. DYOR !!!!! I’ll start slowly and add bits as I see fit ….. The more rules you put into a system, the likelihood (subconsciousor not) it’s more likely to be backfitted. The more rules the less likely it is to besuccessful. Ask yourself, if it’s toogood to be true the more it likely is. This is no different to “stock market tips”, “Nigerian **********” and other money fleecing agents ….. IF there was a “Holy Grail” then it would be found, punted, the odds slowly diminished to the point where the S/R continued but the POTturned to a The more precise and scientific you become in pursuit of the prefect system, the more imponderables crop up (Oz Sports Forum) ….. my examples include; (1) say one of your rules is a certain jockey ….. you had better take into account; Is the jockey fit?, has the jockey had an argument with his missus?, has he had a punch up / feud with a fellow jockey and is looking for revenge?, does he have depression (YES at least 10% would have), Will he get his mount hemmed in for financial gain? ….. you could probably add 10 more !!!, (2) Barriers, now that’s a neasy one isn’t it ????, Is it the first time the horse has drawn a decent barrier?, are the horses both outside and inside conducive to your selection being able to take advantage of it’s normal pattern of racing in the first 20 or so metres, is the barrier attendant competent ??????, Do the odds represent the advantage / disadvantage of the barrier ???? (that’s a biggie), Stood flatfooted and missed the start, the horse that was supposed to lead missed the jump and the barrier advantage was lost ….. How many rules MULTIPLIED by TEN (impodnerables)???? do you need ????? The opponents to this will say, these apply to all the horses in the race, that’s correct too, but all you’ve done is multiply the ORIGINAL RULES times the IMPONDERABLES times the NUMBER of HORSES in the race. How do you line up a 3rd in a Moe Maiden, first up by a gelding who has had blinkers on first time, is a gelding and has had 5 lifetime starts ….. with a 10th at Moonee Valley by a filly who has had 25 lifetime starts, fourth up, now back 200 mtrs in distance, but at a track where’she’s won before ….. with an import ….. not to mention previous campaigns, not to mention the other 13 horses ???? Gimme a break. The more rules the less chance of repetition. Last edited by Barny : 24th December 2011 at 04:51 PM. 
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode