Crash,

The incorrect (in my opinion) statements I was referred to were:

QUOTE: Some punters can make the odd buck on place betting but your dealing with very unstable divi that is more than likely to crash downward as upward [cosistentcy is what I'm looking for in my above point of view] just as you have put your money on or worse, AFTER the start

The statement regarding the unstable dividend is is plainly false as there are a lot of options for betting on place or each way that have a fixed dividend. You either made the assumption that all place betting is done with the TAB which is incorrect or maybe you are not aware of the other options.

QUOTE: I wonder why pro Punters avoid the place bet and exotics like the plague [as well as everthing ealse I've mentioned]?

Again this doesn't sound like an opinion to me but rather a statement of fact as you see it - again incorrect as some successful pro-punters do bet exotics in a big way.


As I said before I agreed with most of the things you said but my reply was meant to point out that a couple of your points were inaccurate. It was not meant to offend you (and if it did I certainly apologise for that) and I believe it was addressed to you so I am not sure what you mean by "how about addressing them to the writer".

_________________
"Computers can do that????" - Homer Simpson

[ This Message was edited by: becareful on 2003-09-11 13:21 ]

Becareful,

To all who can read, your post was cleary addressed to "Xanadu".

Regarding my opinons as to place betting, I will stick to them as they are not "plainly false" as most punters still bet on the tote as far as I know and not on a p/c or with a bookie.

As to "Pro punters" this point has been delt with between us on the preveous page [1], so I would be labouring my point by repeating that it was a generalization only regarding it. If you like, I can edit my original post for you and preface "Pro punters" with the word "most" [?].

Saying that what I said "sounds like a statement of fact" [to you] even after I have said it is but "my opinion" [just like you like your statements in posts to be considered] and I was talking generaly, twice or three times now, attracts the only response I can think of : To most people the earth seems flat, and even when told otherwise some will still believe it to be so.

What ealse can I say?

Cheers.

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-09-11 14:28 ]

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-09-11 18:18 ]

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-09-11 18:20 ]

becareful,

My comments were meant to be a "razz" and from your reply you took this in the spirit in which they were intended. To set the record straight, if my comments caused you any embarrassment then I offer my apologies. You have shown yourself to be a person with a sense of humour-unfortunately others do not show these same qualities.

Good luck to you.:smile:

Crash,

So you are not objecting to my original post where I disagreed with you (or "corrected" you - however you want to put it). But rather you are objecting to my reply to Xanadu???? :roll:

Xanadu - no offence taken! :smile:

__________________
"Computers can do that????" - Homer Simpson

For the record....
(1)I bet e/w on races where I cannot lose.
(2)I also have a separate "gambling" account for win only, some quinella & some trifecta betting.
(3)I use betfair to lay horses.
(4)I bet e/w on UK races.
(5)My way is obviously not the only way to make money.
(6)For some reason, this is the second time Xanadu has had an entirely unprovoked "razz" at me.
(6.5)I keep reading these posts, so I must have some sense of humour.
Which reminds me of the horse who was told by his trainer he was on his last chance or he'd end up pulling the milk-cart. At his next start he was tailed off, with the jockey giving him a good belting. He turned to the over zealous rider and said, "ease up mate, I've got to be up at 3.00am tomorrow".

:smile:

Becareful,

Right on.

I was objecting to your post that disagrees with my point of view, addressed to "Xanadu" and not to the writer. Not for disagreeing with me per-se, and your wording "correcting" rather than "disagree" which applies to claimed facts and not to opinion.
If I claim a fact I will say so, as I assume that of all I read in this forum without it being stated as a preface to all comment [the sky is blue].

Anyhow, I hope that clears that up [I'm a bit touchy at the moment as Handbrakes PMT's are the devils own work inflicted on a poor boy. At 15yrs. younger than me she still gets em'].

What the hell is a "Razz" anyway ? Is that "youthspeak" for taking the micky?

Cheers.

Hi Dale,

Some time ago Practical Punting Magazine had a series of systems know as the "suit of diamonds". They used the P/W ratio as a basis for all 13 systems and claimed some nice wins, although I doubt it was tested long enough to be sure. Nonetheless I like the idea and wish it was included in my selection software (Price predictor pro gold v2).

I noticed Gunny72 mentioned the importance of Fitness. Perhaps combining your idea with the fitness statistics of Barry Blakemore (The Key Factor is Fitness - book) may give you what you need to beat the tote.

I also note Gunny72 mentions the importance of value, but what ratings are the most accurate? How relavant are they on the day? Perhaps sticking to 4/1 or better is a way of getting value "for the rest of us", but I know some professionals would recoil in horror at this suggestion. Personally, when I design a system, I look at the spread of historic winning dividends, and then bet on selections that are offering a return in the upper range of these dividends.

@Lenny

[ This Message was edited by: Lenny on 2003-09-11 17:48 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Lenny on 2003-09-11 17:49 ]

Hi Lenny,i've got about 100 old P.P.M's but once they put the price up and reduced the contents i stopped buying them,if you or anyone out there have a copy with these 13 systems i would appreaciate it greatly if you could post them.

I agree with the fitness and value sentiments and if class was added to those two factors a punters path would be paved with gold,if only it was that easy lol.

Talking about P.P.M back in 91 i sent them a system which they published under the name The Tewes Thunderbolt,i think it first appeared in the may 91 edition,as i recall Richard Hartley JNR liked the approach a lot and they pulled it out from time to time when they had their best of P.P.M. readers Systems.

Anyhow to cut a long story short i ended up giving up on it way too early as i was young and stupid,if anyone out there has used it or still uses it let me know how you got on.

Keep it up Guys,
This is dead set better than the soapies.


[ This Message was edited by: kenchar on 2003-09-11 20:43 ]

Hi Dale,

How about posting your system here. I'd like to give it a go.

The 13 systems you are after go like this. Actually, I'll only give you 5 - not because I'm a tease :wink: but because I don't want to be accused of breaching copyright. If the coast is clear and no-one objects, I'll give you the other 8, or else give me your email address.

SUIT OF DIAMONDS (Practical Punting)

Legend:
X is spell
P is place 123
* is anything

General rules:
1) Saturday, Wednesday and any full
form day
2) Sydney/Melbourne/Brisbane
metropolitan tracks
3) Eliminate scratchings
4) Place/Win ratio
5) 3 highest ratio each race, on equal
thirds keep both, if more ignore
6) (Optional) Elimate 1st uppers

Ace Of Diamonds (Strike rate 26.8%/Profit on turnover 78.8%) pick 19 from 71
1) Place SR 80-99%
2) W/P 4.0+
3) Last start 1,2,3
4) Ignore 1st up
5) If more than 1 selection, ignore

2OD (Ws/Pr 26/146.5) 6/23
1) EF must read *11P or 11PP
2) W/P 2.0+
3) Elim if won last 3 starts

3OD (Ws/Pr 50/194.3) 7/14
1) 3 wins in EF
2) Elim if won last 3 starts
3) W/P 2.0+

4OD (Ws/Pr 19.6/264.3) 9/46
1) Last 4 runs must be PP14 or P1x4 or P144
2) P/W 2.0+

5OD (Ws/Pr 22/49.7) 17/77
1) EF must read ANY11ANY or X11ANY
2) Elim if won last 3 starts
3) 6th or better last start
4) P/W 1.5+

From the POT figures you can imagine they need more testing. Tell me how you go.

@Lenny

[ This Message was edited by: Lenny on 2003-09-12 01:53 ]