I assume your 'best bets' were those that you rated on top at no more than $3 ???

I guess the secret is to actually believe and trust the ratings that you have in front of you.

I've just been experimenting with them on paper over the last week and I wasn't really game to trust them. However, I'm just looking at the ratings that I had worked out for today, and yes, Cool Trent actually came out on top and the ratings also found some other good winners. I'm definitely going to have to look at this.

I don't think I'll try the tipping comp - not keen on a forced bet on the feature races or the all-up.

Instead I'll keep a tally of how the best bets from my ratings go starting from last week. I'll calculate it at $10 on each selection at top fluctuation.

18/12/04 Flemington: 2/3 +39

22/12/04 Sandown: 0/3 -30

26/12/04 Randwick 3/6 +72

26/12/04 Caulfield 3/4 +52

Total to date: 8/16; out 160 in 293 = +133 (83% profit on turnover)

Exactly right. The best way to bet them is to have a base bet (e.g.$10) and then to multiply that by the value you get.

e.g Cool Trent $5 available/ $1.8 assessed = 2.8, so the bet is 28@5

Secateurs $1.9/$1.8 = 1.1, so the bet is 11@1.9

See that's where I go wrong I think. I tend to be too influenced by the betting market, so I'd probably be too scared to put the bigger bet on the longer priced one.

I'm thinking of changing that somewhat and giving tipsters a little more freedom.

Indeed that is without a doubt the biggest mistake punters make, basing there bets on the current market, rather than there own personal opinion

Chuck