General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Had a few "drinks"........ need to as I have to watch Scotland attempt to play "football" etc etc etc
I now "know" that my system's ratings were up to a "good " standard from BACKING perspective.....as have taken time to check out results / odds IR/ results etc etc ........... ( Basically takes about 2 days to analyse 1 days results on ratings ....) Having been "disillusioned" re "breaking-evenish" on LAYING horses below 50% line .... it took me some time to get round to the detailed checking required.........
Unfortunately the individual who was prepared to use ratings was ONLY interested to use them from LAYING perspective.........and in PLACE MARKET only.
Having now analysed results .......over hundreds of races......( 800 ONLY...so far).......had the system been used to BACK horses in top rated, then substantial amounts of money would have been made!
"Life" has thrown a few bricks at me.........and it takes so much TIME to carry out numerous "checks" on results etc etc......that it is not surprising it has taken me so LONG to just appreciate just how "good" the system ratings were!
I am not criticising the guy who used "system" rating to LAY horses............that is what he was "good" at...........
I always said that "system" was devised from BACKING perspective...............LAYING was "irrelevant" to my mind-set....but in 2008 I was prepared to see what would happen if used to LAY horses in PLACE market.. The ones below the 50% of field line on ratings.........and , with AFTER-TIMING, no surprise..........the ratings BELOW the 50% line wer CRAP from LAYING in PLACE market ! ( As system was devised with sole objective being to BACK horses in TOP RATED......then the fact LAYING those BELOW the 50% of field line "failed" ....well about broke -even........which is FAILURE.....is NO SURPRISE to me..
I'd no idea how such LAYING strategies would pan out .......and "know" now that YES ....the system ratings COULD have been used to LAY horses..........but LAYING is for BOOKIES....................and NOT what sytem was devised for !
It is so "easy" to be knocked off the road towards making a "system" of ratings be useful from BETTING perspective..........
The "negativity".....or lack of "foresight" of others ......can knock you back when you are attempting to produce a "system" at a high level.... On attempting to convert all the "ideas" in your heid re RATING horses in a race, into a computerised system.......is extremely "difficult".
However, as I "know" the system of rating horses is based on KEY FACTORS that can only become "not so important" should the UK racing powers change the system, particularly the HANDICAPPING of horses etc.....then I "know" now that I was always "right" re the high standard the system of rating horses was /is..........and having had YET ANOTHER "obstacle" in my way towards USING the system from BACKING perspective recently......I have YET AGAIN had to delay the inevitable use of full rating system to use .............A family bereavement was the "obstacle" ( I know this sounds callous" but what would you do having spent the last 20 years devising such a "system"......................however, I NEED to go FULL STEAM ahead on using the system ratings with STRATEGIES that appear to "work".
Having said that ........I now HAVE to look after family more so than ever before in my life.......and it WILL take me a few more weeks to deal with the "normalities" of someone close dying.............................if a few more weeks is "enough" ....which is unlikely!
The ones who believe RATINGS are a pile of excrement are "irrational" in their view ( naturally) IMO..........however, WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER TO BE RATINGS THAT ARE "USEFUL" FROM BETING PERSPECTIVE...........BUT ONLY FROM BACKING USE....................NOT LAYING USE........AS LAYING IS FOR THOSE WHO ARE LESS "KNOWLEDGEABLE" THAN BACKERS ( backing is far more "difficult" than LAYING..................that is why the return on bets is "better" BACKING than LAYING ....)
Interested in opinions of those who understand just how "complicated" it is to rate a race........more than the opinions of those who ain't got a clue re- races.............though a detailed and rational outline of those who believe RATINGS are "useless" is worth listening to....thus the thread awaits "reasoned" response" !
GL with bets......as whether you use a system of RATINGS or not......LUCK is a factor that CAN come into how a race pans out....though IMO ....LUCK is irrelevant re reasons why horses WIN /PLACE in races..................GENERALLY!
I now "know" that my system's ratings were up to a "good " standard from BACKING perspective.....as have taken time to check out results / odds IR/ results etc etc ........... ( Basically takes about 2 days to analyse 1 days results on ratings ....) Having been "disillusioned" re "breaking-evenish" on LAYING horses below 50% line .... it took me some time to get round to the detailed checking required.........
Unfortunately the individual who was prepared to use ratings was ONLY interested to use them from LAYING perspective.........and in PLACE MARKET only.
Having now analysed results .......over hundreds of races......( 800 ONLY...so far).......had the system been used to BACK horses in top rated, then substantial amounts of money would have been made!
"Life" has thrown a few bricks at me.........and it takes so much TIME to carry out numerous "checks" on results etc etc......that it is not surprising it has taken me so LONG to just appreciate just how "good" the system ratings were!
I am not criticising the guy who used "system" rating to LAY horses............that is what he was "good" at...........
I always said that "system" was devised from BACKING perspective...............LAYING was "irrelevant" to my mind-set....but in 2008 I was prepared to see what would happen if used to LAY horses in PLACE market.. The ones below the 50% of field line on ratings.........and , with AFTER-TIMING, no surprise..........the ratings BELOW the 50% line wer CRAP from LAYING in PLACE market ! ( As system was devised with sole objective being to BACK horses in TOP RATED......then the fact LAYING those BELOW the 50% of field line "failed" ....well about broke -even........which is FAILURE.....is NO SURPRISE to me..
I'd no idea how such LAYING strategies would pan out .......and "know" now that YES ....the system ratings COULD have been used to LAY horses..........but LAYING is for BOOKIES....................and NOT what sytem was devised for !
It is so "easy" to be knocked off the road towards making a "system" of ratings be useful from BETTING perspective..........
The "negativity".....or lack of "foresight" of others ......can knock you back when you are attempting to produce a "system" at a high level.... On attempting to convert all the "ideas" in your heid re RATING horses in a race, into a computerised system.......is extremely "difficult".
However, as I "know" the system of rating horses is based on KEY FACTORS that can only become "not so important" should the UK racing powers change the system, particularly the HANDICAPPING of horses etc.....then I "know" now that I was always "right" re the high standard the system of rating horses was /is..........and having had YET ANOTHER "obstacle" in my way towards USING the system from BACKING perspective recently......I have YET AGAIN had to delay the inevitable use of full rating system to use .............A family bereavement was the "obstacle" ( I know this sounds callous" but what would you do having spent the last 20 years devising such a "system"......................however, I NEED to go FULL STEAM ahead on using the system ratings with STRATEGIES that appear to "work".
Having said that ........I now HAVE to look after family more so than ever before in my life.......and it WILL take me a few more weeks to deal with the "normalities" of someone close dying.............................if a few more weeks is "enough" ....which is unlikely!
The ones who believe RATINGS are a pile of excrement are "irrational" in their view ( naturally) IMO..........however, WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER TO BE RATINGS THAT ARE "USEFUL" FROM BETING PERSPECTIVE...........BUT ONLY FROM BACKING USE....................NOT LAYING USE........AS LAYING IS FOR THOSE WHO ARE LESS "KNOWLEDGEABLE" THAN BACKERS ( backing is far more "difficult" than LAYING..................that is why the return on bets is "better" BACKING than LAYING ....)
Interested in opinions of those who understand just how "complicated" it is to rate a race........more than the opinions of those who ain't got a clue re- races.............though a detailed and rational outline of those who believe RATINGS are "useless" is worth listening to....thus the thread awaits "reasoned" response" !
GL with bets......as whether you use a system of RATINGS or not......LUCK is a factor that CAN come into how a race pans out....though IMO ....LUCK is irrelevant re reasons why horses WIN /PLACE in races..................GENERALLY!
Show More
Hi DFC,
Rating horses is the way to go, providing ~ you use pure logic to achieve those ratings.
Don't adulterate the logic with past subjective stats.
Once rated they need to be converted to a price accurately, and then only back them if the price you can obtain is higher than your price. If the price is lower then lay them.
It is a true-ism that a horses past performance is the best indicator to its future performances.
I would also suggest you stick to the best grade horses as their performances are more reliable to rate and can save you a lot of wasted time rating the lower class inconsistent beasts.
Rating horses is the way to go, providing ~ you use pure logic to achieve those ratings.
Don't adulterate the logic with past subjective stats.
Once rated they need to be converted to a price accurately, and then only back them if the price you can obtain is higher than your price. If the price is lower then lay them.
It is a true-ism that a horses past performance is the best indicator to its future performances.
I would also suggest you stick to the best grade horses as their performances are more reliable to rate and can save you a lot of wasted time rating the lower class inconsistent beasts.
Thanks for post Compound Magic.
"Pure logic" is involved in arriving at RATINGS, but there is "subjective" input which is essential IMO to enable the "well covered up horses" to be awarded points for them having certain factors in their favour for the going/ distance of race/ race type etc etc. . this is bound to happen in rating UK races, mainly due to sudden changes in weather conditions, then the ratings can be "topsy-turvy" ! Generally I get KEY FACTORS "right" though, so RATINGS are GENERALLY up to "good" standard ( Hard to say how "good" they are as little to compare against. The AM site was useful for comparing ratings, but no longer "free-access"........)
There is also input that few will use, but it is used in a systematic way and is based on RACE RECORD. As you say the past results is a KEY FACTOR is rating a horse, but it needs a degree of complexity to rate such results, based on results of hundreds of races. Trainer ability for the race type/distance/going etc etc is just as important....plus other FACTORS......as it is the combination of factors for a race that can indicate a horse to hold a "good chance" of running well in race........not just RACE RECORD IMO.
From memory I believe you may be based in AUSTRALIA, where I understand there is no NATIONAL HUNT type racing? The CLASS handicap race types ( HURDLES especially) in NH are a mine-field for punters and I agree that such race types are where my system does well with RATINGS.The complexity of such races needs a system that is "complex", and if you can have a system work well on RATINGS in such types of races, then the system should still do well on other race classes.....as KEY FACTORS are KEY FACTORS whatever the race class.....GENERALLY! I could just bet on such races ( CLASS HURDLE RACES) and do well on them, but as the system works well on all race types , then it would be daft to leave such races alone.
The 2nd paragraph of your post re the importance "of then only back them if the price you can obtain is higher than your price. If the price is lower then lay them." I understand the view expressed, but it all depends how "good" the RATINGS are.
The system was NOT devised for LAY bets..........it was devised to highlight good odds horses that may run well in races. So I certainly won't be going down the LAY route.......as the BACKING route is the higher return route to take for me. ( I do have strategies for LAYING in WIN market only........but they are no where near as attractive as the BACKING strategies.
The top 3 rated horses ( I ignore odds on shots) appear to do well ........enough to just back the top rated one to WIN and back the lowest odds one of the next 2 down to WIN ( 4 down if an odds on shot in top 3). The third horse , if backed, also shows it can be profitable if backed to WIN .....provided odds are within certain range.
No attempt has been made to try to "converted to a price accurately", as GENERALLY the odds of the 2 selected to back to WIN are sufficient to enable good profit to be made.
The STRATEGY on horses below the top "3" rated.........down to 50% +1 of field size......appears to work well.... PROVIDED HORSES' ODDS ARE WITHIN CERTAIN ODDS RANGE ( NOT LOW ODDS ONES!) ! So YES odds are VITALLY important.........but not moved on to trying to "converted to a price accurately" etc, as you can only do that as best you can on LIVE RACES etc ( when just checking whether a set STRATEGY "works" on past rated races, that is sufficient at this stage.)
Only checked 800 races previously rated for 31 days....SO FAR.....( have another 28 days races to be checked!!!)......and checked out how using SET STRATEGIES might have fared. SO FAR the profit potential is far higher than I imagined it might be.......
The point I believe is important re RATINGS is ....thoroughly check all facts re ODDS at the off and IR on the rated horses. It is so "easy" to discard a system's ratings by cursorily glancing at them....Detailed checking is NEEDED....and the TIME element to do so is huge......However, it does clarify whether the ratings are of a standard suitable for betting purposes.......whether "good" or "useless"........
You need to have immense "faith" in your "logic" to spend the necessary time evaluating ratings, then to find STRATEGIES that appear to "work" well.
I'm currently waiting ....once again.... on a friend carrying out some changes to system....BEFORE I can start betting using RATINGS and STRATEGIES. Hopefully he will make changes next week......then ,once I've dealt with various family related matters, should be ready to go at start of AUGUST
I'd better do some household "chores" ....
......Cheers the nooooo
Thanks again for post CM.
"Pure logic" is involved in arriving at RATINGS, but there is "subjective" input which is essential IMO to enable the "well covered up horses" to be awarded points for them having certain factors in their favour for the going/ distance of race/ race type etc etc. . this is bound to happen in rating UK races, mainly due to sudden changes in weather conditions, then the ratings can be "topsy-turvy" ! Generally I get KEY FACTORS "right" though, so RATINGS are GENERALLY up to "good" standard ( Hard to say how "good" they are as little to compare against. The AM site was useful for comparing ratings, but no longer "free-access"........)
There is also input that few will use, but it is used in a systematic way and is based on RACE RECORD. As you say the past results is a KEY FACTOR is rating a horse, but it needs a degree of complexity to rate such results, based on results of hundreds of races. Trainer ability for the race type/distance/going etc etc is just as important....plus other FACTORS......as it is the combination of factors for a race that can indicate a horse to hold a "good chance" of running well in race........not just RACE RECORD IMO.
From memory I believe you may be based in AUSTRALIA, where I understand there is no NATIONAL HUNT type racing? The CLASS handicap race types ( HURDLES especially) in NH are a mine-field for punters and I agree that such race types are where my system does well with RATINGS.The complexity of such races needs a system that is "complex", and if you can have a system work well on RATINGS in such types of races, then the system should still do well on other race classes.....as KEY FACTORS are KEY FACTORS whatever the race class.....GENERALLY! I could just bet on such races ( CLASS HURDLE RACES) and do well on them, but as the system works well on all race types , then it would be daft to leave such races alone.
The 2nd paragraph of your post re the importance "of then only back them if the price you can obtain is higher than your price. If the price is lower then lay them." I understand the view expressed, but it all depends how "good" the RATINGS are.
The system was NOT devised for LAY bets..........it was devised to highlight good odds horses that may run well in races. So I certainly won't be going down the LAY route.......as the BACKING route is the higher return route to take for me. ( I do have strategies for LAYING in WIN market only........but they are no where near as attractive as the BACKING strategies.
The top 3 rated horses ( I ignore odds on shots) appear to do well ........enough to just back the top rated one to WIN and back the lowest odds one of the next 2 down to WIN ( 4 down if an odds on shot in top 3). The third horse , if backed, also shows it can be profitable if backed to WIN .....provided odds are within certain range.
No attempt has been made to try to "converted to a price accurately", as GENERALLY the odds of the 2 selected to back to WIN are sufficient to enable good profit to be made.
The STRATEGY on horses below the top "3" rated.........down to 50% +1 of field size......appears to work well.... PROVIDED HORSES' ODDS ARE WITHIN CERTAIN ODDS RANGE ( NOT LOW ODDS ONES!) ! So YES odds are VITALLY important.........but not moved on to trying to "converted to a price accurately" etc, as you can only do that as best you can on LIVE RACES etc ( when just checking whether a set STRATEGY "works" on past rated races, that is sufficient at this stage.)
Only checked 800 races previously rated for 31 days....SO FAR.....( have another 28 days races to be checked!!!)......and checked out how using SET STRATEGIES might have fared. SO FAR the profit potential is far higher than I imagined it might be.......
The point I believe is important re RATINGS is ....thoroughly check all facts re ODDS at the off and IR on the rated horses. It is so "easy" to discard a system's ratings by cursorily glancing at them....Detailed checking is NEEDED....and the TIME element to do so is huge......However, it does clarify whether the ratings are of a standard suitable for betting purposes.......whether "good" or "useless"........
You need to have immense "faith" in your "logic" to spend the necessary time evaluating ratings, then to find STRATEGIES that appear to "work" well.
I'm currently waiting ....once again.... on a friend carrying out some changes to system....BEFORE I can start betting using RATINGS and STRATEGIES. Hopefully he will make changes next week......then ,once I've dealt with various family related matters, should be ready to go at start of AUGUST
I'd better do some household "chores" ....
......Cheers the noooooThanks again for post CM.
Hello DFC. hope you`re keeping well. I`ve just had a quick read through the posts, off out shortly for a game of snooker.
I have recently got hold of some ratings again, from an old friend, i used to use them around a year ago, some sucess i might add. But as always i tend to take too much on, instead of sticking to one thing and making a go of it, i use all sorts of methods / systems and pure guesses etc.
I posted these ratings on my thread last Friday and they found 2 winners and five placed, four of which were double figure prices. So i`ll concentrate on these ratings and nothing else.
I`ve refined my Premier league football system of late goals, i`ve looked back at all my bets over last 3 seasons and feel confident i can continue to make a profit.
I look forward to you starting to use your ratings and hopefully you`ll keep in front. Sorry to hear of your family bereavement, never an easy time i know.
Rating races is extremely difficult as i have an insight into what`s required and to be honest i just don`t have the time, but i`m confident it`s the best way to try to eke out a profit.
I`ll post the ratings available to me every day next week around 11:00.
Good luck in what is an incredibly difficult game.
I have recently got hold of some ratings again, from an old friend, i used to use them around a year ago, some sucess i might add. But as always i tend to take too much on, instead of sticking to one thing and making a go of it, i use all sorts of methods / systems and pure guesses etc.
I posted these ratings on my thread last Friday and they found 2 winners and five placed, four of which were double figure prices. So i`ll concentrate on these ratings and nothing else.
I`ve refined my Premier league football system of late goals, i`ve looked back at all my bets over last 3 seasons and feel confident i can continue to make a profit.
I look forward to you starting to use your ratings and hopefully you`ll keep in front. Sorry to hear of your family bereavement, never an easy time i know.
Rating races is extremely difficult as i have an insight into what`s required and to be honest i just don`t have the time, but i`m confident it`s the best way to try to eke out a profit.
I`ll post the ratings available to me every day next week around 11:00.
Good luck in what is an incredibly difficult game.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539