how do you pick what races to bet on in say a 12 race card ?

i just wait for woody to highlight the winners

used to wait for bg to narrow it down but nowdays he only fancies one strong roughly every 12 months or so

Thats no good TR. If we both wait for each other, our chips will be getting cold! . Personally, rare i would entertain a graded race and you may have the right idea Brain going for A1/A2, as i go for Opens, best dogs. I find them more consistent than graded fodder, where the design of the races are for 6-way dead-heats.

In my experience, knowing a dog well counts for almost everything. In only concentrating in high class hounds, selections often jump off the page at me, without even seeing any form, which eventually, usually just confirms my original hunch. Dont always get it right though. I maintain, you always need a bit of luck

woodmanchester

i have never tried to pick winners from open racing as the form and times are at different tracks.its knowing what form is comparable to the other dogs its racing against

Brian ,in graded racing the key is knowing the dogs ,not " reducing the card to a more manageable level".If you get to know the graded strength at 1 track and are able to spot value when you see it the number of bets you have at any given meeting takes care of itself.
As far as concentrating on the higher grades,if  thats what you are comfortable with then do that.For me the bet is wherever i find it.Frequently low grade races may seem unfathomable but,if you know the dogs well enough,these sorts of races are often the least cometitive and can produce plenty of good bets.

I believe there is a yardstick book comparing times from different tracks over different distances Brain. If you prefer to stick to the graders Hectors advice sound. Think youre best concentrating on just one or two tracks. As you rightly point out, you will get bogged down with dozens of races, countless dogs and an infinate number of formlines otherwise

hectoratoratora

hectoratoratora do you look at cds of the race or just read the form ?

Hove DVD,if you dont actually watch the dogs run ,graded or open,you are a million to one shot

hectoratoratora

thanks. hove seems a faire track. in side traps seem to do well in the really cold

The Belle Vue Owners website gives plenty of information for comparing times for different tracks. Also sectional times for each distance at all tracks. I use it all the time

clacton   

cheers will have look

I like to use the opposite approach to hectoratora

it varies from track to track
there are certain grades at certain tracks
which show a regular bias of winners in certain traps
i feel this is down to the grader
there is a tendency by graders to box up
young improving pups in traps 3 n 4 at some tracks
when they get it wrong and the pup shows
tremendous improvement often at long odds
there's money to be made

Wimbledon is the one to go for. Only 2 meetings per week, proper run to the bend, proper gallop. Doncaster is another fine example of how it should be. Sittingbourne is ok. Sheffield okish, but one of the trips start close to the bend. The Greyhounds seem to run the bends well there. Must be well congigured. Walthamstow was fantastic as well imo. Hope we get to see it again!

Hove's standard 515m is stretching the stamina of many, after years of breeding for speed. Bunching near the line occurs in too many races. Has pneumatic traps also.

Romford - puny track, ludicrous pneumatic trap bias, tight bends, not enough of a gallop. Good track for laying though imo.

Crayford - much the same, with added in dodgy track preparation.

Henlow - close, low camera angle makes it much harder to perceive the speed. Too much trouble at the first bend for my liking. The "5th bend" also makes it a tricky track to adapt to for many.

agree with stow there
another thing you could do
is check out the performance of favs
take hove for example
seem to do well at A10/A11
also at A2
but not in between
check it out for yourself first though

Stow_judge and irishone    thanks for the above

Hove 2011 Clear favs

Grade no. of Runs    No. of Wins    Win%
A1    44    13    29.55
A2    146    49    33.56
A3    186    60    32.26
A4    259    86    33.2
A5    291    93    31.96
A6    276    82    29.71
A7    237    82    34.6
A8    211    58    27.49
A9    161    54    33.54
A10    182    45    24.73
A11    164    53    32.32
D1    41    22    53.66
IT    5    2    40
OR    446    193    43.27
S1    1    0    0
S2    17    3    17.65

All stats provided by www.dogstats.co.uk

Hove 2011 favs including joint and co favs

Grade    No. of Runs    No. of Wins    Win%
A1    65    16    24.62
A2    214    63    29.44
A3    350    94    26.86
A4    408    123    30.15
A5    438    129    29.45
A6    431    119    27.61
A7    368    116    31.52
A8    299    83    27.76
A9    257    79    30.74
A10    245    64    26.12
A11    212    67    31.6
D1    57    28    49.12
IT    7    3    42.86
OR    550    224    40.73
S1    1    0    0
S2    25    6    24

All stats provided by www.dogstats.co.uk

The class method is a good angle, particularly if you grade them yourself. A certain journalist named Mr. Austin used to do his own grades at the Stow. He'd have ca 4 or 5 grades for each actual grade. He'd print off his racecard and grade the race. He'd then compare the grade of the race with what he'd attribute to the Greyhounds recent runs. He'd spot the Greyhounds that had dropped through his grades and know his bets in a very short time. It worked very well from what I observed.

Going back to your original question, the top grades would generally be more competitive. Racing managers at different tracks have different approaches. Some grade for plenty of 3/1 the field races, where others grade to have some short favs in there too. Chris Page at the stow often tried to give the 1st & last favs a good chance. His idea was to give people a good chance of backing a winner early to get them betting, then give them a good chance of backing a winner in the last race to send them home happy. (So they'd be more likely to come back.) Some tracks also let the newcomers with a bit of Irish form in lightly, whereas others give them a tough time early on. (e.g. at Romford). An RM at a bookmaker owned track might be much more woried about someone landing a gamble with a newcomer, than at non bookmaker owned tracks.

One thing well worth doing is specializing. It's better to focus on a smaller subset of the races at a track and do the job properly, rather than having a weaker view of all the races on the card. Many tracks will have 300+ Greyhounds on the graded strength, so it's no small task to get to grips with them all.

One other reason Romford appears to be tricky is that they have so many meetings each week. Also, they mix the Bags and non-Bags runners up. At the Stow, the Bags and non-Bags were largely separate, so you could drop the Bags stuff largely and focus on the evening stuff.

2011 clear favs

Track    Win% All    Win% First Race     Win% Last Race
Belle Vue    33.75    35.36    28.72
Crayford    27.64    22.39    21.61
Doncaster    33.37    28.41    40.7
Hall Green    31.13    30.14    31.1
Harlow    32.59    33    33.67
Henlow    34.85    29.03    40.6
Hove    33.56    32.31    36.11
Kinsley    24.21    24.43    23.31
Mildenhall    27.18    27.54    24.24
Monmore    30.23    31.48    25.42
Newcastle    29.29    24.77    22.42
Nottingham    33.66    28.65    29.94
Oxford    27.48    38.82    25.16
Pelaw Grange    30.91    37.27    29.31
Perry Barr    30.16    24.44    26.04
Peterborough    37.2    38.35    41.13
Poole    30.7    32.5    35.37
Romford    29.68    35.4    27.62
Shawfield    33.93    30.34    37.11
Sheffield    33.54    29.06    34.98
Sittingbourne    29.18    29.75    26.61
Sunderland    30.38    35.4    23.47
Swindon    31.62    34.16    29.05
Wimbledon    37.16    38.83    29.7
Yarmouth    34.27    30.3    27.21

All stats provided by www.dogstats.co.uk

BRIAN
You have to be very careful about who you get your stats from as well.
You need to know exactly what you want and what they are prepared to give you.
For example the stats above refer to Bookies S P's
There is no explanation of what they do with joint or co favourites
... and they are probrably not from 12 race meetings! (which is what you specifically requested)
... and of course what you really want to know is if they are profitable !

The	stats	would	look	better
in	a	table	imo

quality stow

they should go back to the old 8 race cards
people would bet in every race then

clacton - thanks very much for that link to the BVO site, very useful

generally I avoid the bottom grades,
dodge-pots, improving youngsters, dogs coming down the ladder.
also I tend to leave out A1's and A2's, too competitive.

Improving pups in low grade races often stand out, but problem with
inexperienced pups they rarely put 2 runs together, and repeat performances
are not exactly their strong point.

so I mainly look to A3, A4 and A5's for betting.
and prefer to stick with the graders and narrow it down and knowing the dogs.

just my opinion, people see things differently.

Brian,

2011 clear sp favs in first race of a 12 race meeting. Races with joint or co favs ignored.


Track No. of Runs No. of Wins Win% 1–2% 1–2–3% LSP ROI% A/E IV
Belle Vue 10 1 10.00 40.00 40.00 -7.50 -75.00 0.27 0.60
Crayford 78 14 17.95 39.74 60.26 -35.25 -45.19 0.53 1.07
Doncaster 1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Hall Green 115 30 26.09 49.57 67.83 -29.08 -25.28 0.78 1.56
Harlow 60 21 35.00 56.67 68.33 -11.73 -19.54 0.80 2.05
Henlow 71 19 26.76 52.11 66.20 -26.11 -36.77 0.64 1.52
Hove 187 59 31.55 56.68 70.05 -26.20 -14.01 0.84 1.87
Kinsley 32 11 34.38 53.13 59.38 0.75 2.34 1.01 2.04
Mildenhall 8 2 25.00 50.00 75.00 -2.25 -28.13 0.70 1.50
Monmore 30 10 33.33 56.67 66.67 -3.50 -11.67 0.89 1.98
Newcastle 86 25 29.07 48.84 59.30 -13.95 -16.22 0.84 1.73
Nottingham 45 11 24.44 51.11 71.11 -10.75 -23.89 0.78 1.47
Oxford 95 37 38.95 51.58 64.21 11.35 11.95 1.07 2.31
Pelaw Grange 37 13 35.14 48.65 72.97 0.80 2.16 1.04 2.08
Perry Barr 168 41 24.40 47.02 63.10 -51.25 -30.51 0.73 1.46
Peterborough 1 0 0.00 100.00 100.00 -1.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Poole 62 18 29.03 51.61 72.58 -11.50 -18.55 0.82 1.74
Romford 69 29 42.03 56.52 75.36 20.23 29.31 1.29 2.50
Shawfield 44 14 31.82 54.55 75.00 -8.00 -18.18 0.82 1.59
Sheffield 79 22 27.85 53.16 70.89 -16.88 -21.36 0.79 1.67
Sittingbourne 57 13 22.81 45.61 56.14 -18.40 -32.28 0.67 1.36
Sunderland 116 40 34.48 50.00 65.52 -8.08 -6.97 0.92 2.07
Swindon 75 30 40.00 62.67 70.67 11.28 15.04 1.11 2.35
Wimbledon 11 1 9.09 36.36 63.64 -8.00 -72.73 0.24 0.55
Yarmouth 1 0 0.00 100.00 100.00 -1.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00

2011 clear sp favs in last race of a 12 race meeting. Races with joint or co favs ignored.


Track  No. of Runs No. of Wins Win% 1–2% 1–2–3% LSP ROI% A/E IV
Belle Vue 9 0 0.00 0.00 55.56 -9.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Crayford 83 20 24.10 37.35 60.24 -26.30 -31.69 0.67 1.43
Doncaster 1 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 2.50 250.00 3.50 6.00
Hall Green 113 30 26.55 43.36 60.18 -21.94 -19.42 0.82 1.58
Harlow 55 18 32.73 60.00 72.73 -14.98 -27.24 0.71 1.85
Henlow 68 26 38.24 57.35 72.06 -6.15 -9.05 0.91 2.11
Hove 172 64 37.21 58.72 72.67 -7.59 -4.41 0.96 2.20
Kinsley 27 5 18.52 37.04 55.56 -13.00 -48.15 0.50 1.11
Mildenhall 8 2 25.00 37.50 62.50 -3.20 -40.00 0.65 1.47
Monmore 31 8 25.81 45.16 61.29 -7.50 -24.19 0.75 1.53
Newcastle 85 18 21.18 42.35 60.00 -30.75 -36.18 0.59 1.26
Nottingham 41 11 26.83 56.10 68.29 -9.38 -22.87 0.78 1.53
Oxford 89 22 24.72 40.45 57.30 -26.25 -29.49 0.70 1.47
Pelaw Grange 37 10 27.03 48.65 56.76 -8.75 -23.65 0.74 1.61
Perry Barr 157 41 26.11 50.32 68.15 -37.37 -23.80 0.75 1.55
Peterborough 1 0 0.00 0.00 100.00 -1.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Poole 60 21 35.00 53.33 73.33 -1.24 -2.07 0.96 2.08
Romford 73 13 17.81 28.77 57.53 -32.83 -44.98 0.56 1.06
Shawfield 46 16 34.78 56.52 78.26 -10.23 -22.25 0.81 1.64
Sheffield 89 29 32.58 50.56 65.17 0.13 0.14 0.96 1.95
Sittingbourne 60 14 23.33 46.67 58.33 -24.42 -40.70 0.62 1.38
Sunderland 115 25 21.74 41.74 61.74 -47.95 -41.69 0.58 1.30
Swindon 86 24 27.91 44.19 61.63 -15.45 -17.97 0.82 1.67
Wimbledon 13 4 30.77 53.85 61.54 -1.50 -11.54 0.87 1.82
Yarmouth 3 1 33.33 33.33 33.33 -0.50 -16.67 0.77 2.00

2011 sp favs including joint and co favs in first race of a 12 race meeting.

Track No. of Runs No. of Wins Win% 1–2% 1–2–3% LSP ROI% A/E IV
Belle Vue 10 1 10.00 40.00 40.00 -7.50 -75.00 0.27 0.60
Crayford 137 27 19.71 40.88 58.39 -46.75 -34.12 0.63 1.17
Doncaster 1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Hall Green 171 48 28.07 50.88 66.67 -15.33 -8.96 0.90 1.68
Harlow 67 21 31.34 53.73 64.18 -18.73 -27.95 0.73 1.84
Henlow 98 23 23.47 48.98 64.29 -40.86 -41.69 0.59 1.33
Hove 226 68 30.09 53.98 67.70 -35.45 -15.69 0.83 1.78
Kinsley 40 12 30.00 45.00 55.00 -3.75 -9.38 0.91 1.78
Mildenhall 14 3 21.43 42.86 64.29 -4.75 -33.93 0.61 1.27
Monmore 41 12 29.27 48.78 63.41 -6.75 -16.46 0.83 1.74
Newcastle 134 34 25.37 44.78 61.94 -30.45 -22.72 0.78 1.51
Nottingham 65 18 27.69 53.85 69.23 -3.75 -5.77 0.93 1.66
Oxford 150 55 36.67 51.33 62.00 15.10 10.07 1.07 2.18
Pelaw Grange 76 26 34.21 50.00 67.11 6.80 8.95 1.09 2.02
Perry Barr 220 53 24.09 46.82 64.09 -64.75 -29.43 0.74 1.44
Peterborough 1 0 0.00 100.00 100.00 -1.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Poole 77 24 31.17 54.55 74.03 -6.25 -8.12 0.90 1.87
Romford 148 48 32.43 52.03 67.57 13.98 9.44 1.11 1.93
Shawfield 74 21 28.38 51.35 71.62 -15.00 -20.27 0.80 1.42
Sheffield 125 32 25.60 53.60 68.80 -28.88 -23.10 0.78 1.53
Sittingbourne 86 21 24.42 43.02 56.98 -18.90 -21.98 0.77 1.46
Sunderland 160 51 31.88 48.75 65.63 -12.83 -8.02 0.91 1.91
Swindon 129 39 30.23 52.71 61.24 -7.72 -5.98 0.93 1.78
Wimbledon 15 2 13.33 33.33 60.00 -9.00 -60.00 0.38 0.79
Yarmouth 5 0 0.00 60.00 80.00 -5.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00


2011 sp favs including joint and co favs in last race of a 12 race meeting.

Group No. of Runs No. of Wins Win% 1–2% 1–2–3% LSP ROI% A/E IV
Belle Vue 11 0 0.00 9.09 63.64 -11.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Crayford 129 31 24.03 37.98 58.91 -35.05 -27.17 0.72 1.43
Doncaster 1 1 100.00 100.00 100.00 2.50 250.00 3.50 6.00
Hall Green 168 42 25.00 45.24 60.12 -34.44 -20.50 0.80 1.47
Harlow 69 22 31.88 57.97 72.46 -17.48 -25.34 0.72 1.80
Henlow 101 34 33.66 55.45 72.28 -15.15 -15.00 0.86 1.87
Hove 252 83 32.94 53.97 67.86 -19.59 -7.77 0.93 1.95
Kinsley 46 7 15.22 36.96 56.52 -26.25 -57.07 0.43 0.91
Mildenhall 15 3 20.00 46.67 73.33 -7.20 -48.00 0.56 1.18
Monmore 38 9 23.68 42.11 63.16 -11.50 -30.26 0.71 1.41
Newcastle 127 30 23.62 44.88 61.42 -30.75 -24.21 0.71 1.40
Nottingham 74 19 25.68 51.35 63.51 -9.13 -12.33 0.86 1.50
Oxford 157 39 24.84 40.13 58.60 -36.75 -23.41 0.76 1.48
Pelaw Grange 76 18 23.68 50.00 61.84 -20.25 -26.64 0.72 1.41
Perry Barr 225 62 27.56 49.78 64.44 -34.12 -15.16 0.83 1.64
Peterborough 1 0 0.00 0.00 100.00 -1.00 -100.00 0.00 0.00
Poole 81 23 28.40 48.15 69.14 -15.49 -19.12 0.82 1.68
Romford 141 26 18.44 34.75 60.28 -49.08 -34.81 0.65 1.10
Shawfield 70 24 34.29 58.57 78.57 -8.23 -11.76 0.88 1.65
Sheffield 113 36 31.86 49.56 66.37 0.63 0.55 0.97 1.91
Sittingbourne 80 19 23.75 45.00 57.50 -26.67 -33.34 0.67 1.41
Sunderland 158 32 20.25 40.51 60.13 -66.95 -42.37 0.57 1.21
Swindon 118 34 28.81 47.46 64.41 -10.45 -8.86 0.89 1.72
Wimbledon 13 4 30.77 53.85 61.54 -1.50 -11.54 0.87 1.82
Yarmouth 3 1 33.33 33.33 33.33 -0.50 -16.67 0.77 2.00

All stats provided by www.dogstats.co.uk

You	still	haven't
mastered	the	tables,
have	you?

www.	show	me
how	to	do
the	tables	.com

Betstats365 is a limited company registered in the UK and the creator of Dogstats.co.uk,

You will struggle to find names and addresses on the website

stick a fkin pin in

or

do various doubles with

mr pies nap in all bets

irishone Joined: 22 Sep 06
Replies: 15327 07 Feb 12 22:29   
Betstats365 is a limited company registered in the UK and the creator of Dogstats.co.uk,

You will struggle to find names and addresses on the website


Martin Jones
email martin.jones@dogstats.co.uk

Betstats365 is a limited company with the address readily available. Google Betstats365 and it is the first entry.

The company has been in existence since 2008.

The innuendo of furtive behaviour is both uncalled for and insulting. I am aware that the betting industry is plagued by rogues and charlatans and neccessitates a guarded approach, however we should not all be tarred with the same brush.

This	is	for
stow	judge

That's

fan

table

tastic

Stow

Just a thought. As requested I have objected to the L&Q plans, but it might be more encouraging for some people if you could put together a template response that they can cut and paste the answers into the online form. Specifically site address and description of development.

Statistician • February 8, 2012 11:50 AM GMT

"The innuendo of furtive behaviour is both uncalled for and insulting."

Excerpt from Forum Terms & Conditions
4.All users of the Betfair Forum agree not to post any item or any links to content that TSEG deems:
4.to contain any form of advertising, promotional materials or any form of commercial activity

Its definitely not an innuendo of "furtive" behaviour

Joined: 22 Sep 06
Replies: 15385 06 Feb 12 14:53   
agree with stow there
another thing you could do
is check out the performance of favs
take hove for example
seem to do well at A10/A11
also at A2
but not in between
check it out for yourself first though


I am sure that your responses are in no way linked to the stats I posted disproving this drivel. Toys out of the pram.

	yeah
but	at
least	I
can	do
tables

So

Can

I

now

obviously	not	as	well
as	I	thought