Thanks for all posts, Having been a former member and was so for 8 years I just wanted to know if anyone knew last years results. Nobody unfortunately has given me the answer. I'm fully aware of the disputed adds and yes it can be difficult to get on.

What I wanted was any current member and do they know last years results.

hello judge - i seem to remember you - i have been a member for 17 years now (not quite since the start) and rue-the-day is correct that results now are as strong and consistent as they have ever been
i have not quite made the £232,000 in 8 years as in the advert, but i am not far off with over £200k profit in total using half the stakes advised (i bet to £50 not £100)so i am very happy
2013 was the 2nd worst year ever, but still a 5 figure profit and as rue-the-day says this can be increased by arbing - already over £3000 ahead in just 2 weeks in 2014 so this year mayhopefully be a really good one
those who come on here saying they can't get the odds advertised are liars or fools, because the 12/1 for that winner Planet of Sound was available for over TWO HOURS!!!

GraveDodger

Thanks for reply

the add caught my eye today and I have to say I was intrigued. I know KB is very astute but my doubt is a lot of the contacts have gone and I heard that ew bets were getting lower and lower in price, as low as 11/10 ew in fact. I believe they had a good Chelt last year and saw a couple of big priced winners at Royal Ascot therefore there must have been some bad runs after that. Does he still use the insiders or is it just straight acc bets now?

Would 2nd grave dodgers profits over the past 8 years, not insiders now ( which I did nt always follow) but since he had streamlined the service with main account bets and now minor account bets, I now follow all the bets. Today was 4th bet of the year was a minor account bet 5-1 each-way which the sp was 3-1, the horse came 2ndand indeed went to 1.3 ( or maybe less ) in running, so opportunity was there to profit on the race and was unlucky not to hit a big pay day again

how do you make 86% of the stated profit with 50% of the advised stakes?

Just what I was wondering...

how do you make 86% of the stated profit with 50% of the advised stakes?

Not sure how grave dodger did it but I also made about the same as grave dodger using 50% of stakes, like today would be an official break even day, I would make 2 points profit, by backing it again 2 points each-way at 5-1 and lay 3points at just over 3-1, and lay 2 points place at 1.5,

"And if you play in running with our amazing 11-10 ew shots you could make even more money!!"

WALOFS

Obviously choking for members

Paul120 28 Nov 13 12:20 Joined: 06 Jan 12 | Topic/replies: 16 | Blogger: Paul120's blog
My mistake, Booth's given an each way major account bet on Third Intention at 6/4

I for one will not be renewing next year, the service is a disgrace
Rate reply:
| report block user

Paul's a happy man eh? He must be getting different selections from Grave Fodger and his diddy pal. Or he's not halving his stake then laying off then backing in running,laying off again then backing up the run in which is what you're meant to do Paul ffs!!!

Can anyone confirm that alleged bet today  is-

Newbury 12.50 Dawalan ew 4/7

roida

is that whip crack away comment directed at anyone in particular or is it just pure coincidence?

Roida

i see, the reason I asked is I thought it might be me but I see the logic now. I was the contact for Crack Away Jack bets a few years back :-)

Dodger...if he's that good why dont he bet them himself and refrain from selling the tips?

What a load of sh1te!

No

Know the bet was a 4-1 main account bet winner, wondered if all his members got the 4-1 before the gamble down to 9/4 at the off, know the shops held the 4-1 price for a while

Since mid summer last year when he kept it all on one thread . . .

To date,

288 Selections,

66 Winners,

222 Losers,

+ 111.80 points (Time of posting/Advised prices including all Rule 4 deductions)

+ 27.85 points (SP)

Good Luck, always,

Love,

Skinto!


Warwick (Thursday) 14:50, Big Society 9/4 (JC)

Good returns from skinto, I would nt mind those profits, just at mo kb has produced me a good profit for 14 years, need to skinto can keep up the good returns year in year out

rue-the- day 24 Jan 14 13:09 Joined: 24 Dec 02 | Topic/replies: 74 | Blogger: rue-the- day's blog
Good returns from skinto, I would nt mind those profits, just at mo kb has produced me a good profit for 14 years.


WALOFS.

ASA Adjudication on Isiris Racing Services



Isiris Racing Services

PO Box 17North Seaton
Northumberland
NE64 6EW



Date:
6 February 2013

Media:
Press general

Sector:
Leisure


Number of complaints:
1

Complaint Ref:
A12-209598

Background


Summary of Council decision:

Two issues were investigated, both were Upheld.

Ad


A press ad, for Isiris Racing Services, a betting tipster, included the claims "… with a strike-rate in the region of 80% (currently 90% with 18 out of our last 20 bets all successful)". Large red text below stated "90% STRIKE-RATE". Further text included "… members may request a full list of every bet over the past 7 years, showing well over £210,000 profit per member".

Issue


The complainant challenged whether:

1. the claim "90% STRIKE-RATE" was misleading, because he believed many of the bets were each-way or split stake bets which had returned less money than was staked; and

2. the claim "… well over £210,000 profit per member" was misleading and could be substantiated.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.13.113.73.9

Response


1. Isiris Racing Services (Isiris) said if a bet was advised to finish in the first three (each-way) and it finished in the first three, then it was successful because it had done what was predicted. They said the ad included details of profit and strike rates and the reader could therefore easily see the extent to which one correlated with another, which in this case was a 90% strike rate correlated with £4,700 profit. They pointed out that the ad also included a race-by-race breakdown, including details of a loser. Isiris said the ad was accurate and not misleading.

2. Isiris submitted a spreadsheet, which they said demonstrated that the £210,000 profit claim was correct. They said the results covered almost the previous eight years, from November 2004. However, they did not operate for a year between 2009 and 2010 and it was therefore correct to say the profit figure was achieved from the results of their past seven years. They said there were several thousand results to "prove" however they could also submit the relevant e-mails, which had been lodged with the Racing Post in advance of the relevant events, if necessary.

Assessment


1. Upheld

The ASA noted the ad, which appeared on 25 September 2012, included details of nine bets, one of which had returned "£0 profit". We noted it also included the claim "… with a strike-rate in the region of 80% (currently 90% with 18 out of our last 20 bets all successful)" and therefore considered the claim "90% STRIKE-RATE" would be understood to relate to Isiris's previous 20 tips, including the nine that were listed in the ad. We also considered the ad would be interpreted as suggesting 90% of those tips had returned a profit. We noted Isiris's argument that the ad included a profit claim that clearly correlated to the strike-rate claim but we considered the text "Also, £4714 profit on all bets advised during August!*" would be understood as relating only to August and that any correlation to the claimed "90% STRIKE-RATE" for the previous 20 tips, including the nine the ad stated had taken place since the end of August, was therefore not clear.

We noted the nine bets listed included references such as "EW" and "each way bet" but that the ad stated that all but one of those bets had returned a profit and did not include details of any each-way or split stake bets that had returned less than the amount staked. We considered the ad did not make sufficiently clear, for example by including prominent qualification next to the strike-rate claim itself, that the claimed strike-rate included bets that could return less than was staked. We therefore concluded that the ad was misleading.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.11 (Exaggeration).

2. Upheld

We considered readers of the Racing Post, a publication for sports and betting enthusiasts, were likely to interpret the claim as suggesting that Isiris had provided tips that had potential for a cumulative profit of £210,000 for members who had followed every tip for the previous seven years continuously. We noted the spreadsheet submitted by Isiris, which it appeared related to each tip provided since 5 November 2004. We noted the column headed "CumP/L", which we understood to relate to cumulative profit and loss, included text that appeared to relate to theoretical accumulated profits of over £210,000 in the days immediately preceding the ad's publication. While we acknowledged Isiris's explanation that they had not operated for a year during the period the data referred to, we considered the claim would be understood to refer to the past seven years, therefore dating back to September 2005, rather than to the total time in which Isiris had operated over the previous eight years. However, whereas the claim referred to the "past 7 years", we understood the cumulative total recorded against those dates in September 2012 included theoretical profits accumulated between November 2004 and September 2005, which was more than seven years previously, as well as a gap of one year during which no tips were provided.

We acknowledged the ad included small print linked to the claims "= £4451 profit*" and "Also, £4714 profit on all bets advised during August!*", which stated "… Total bank required for above profits = £1000. Total turnover for August profit = £11,300. Total turnover for 9 bets = £5100" but that no similar text was included to make clear the total bank needed to place stakes on the relevant forecasts to achieve "… well over £210,000 profit". While we considered the spreadsheet indicated that Isiris had recorded the tips listed since November 2004, we were concerned that it did not demonstrate that their members who had followed every tip "over the past 7 years" had made the profit claimed. We were also concerned that we had not seen evidence that the forecasts were lodged with an independent third party before the relevant events took place. We considered the claim had not been substantiated and that the ad was therefore misleading.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.11 (Exaggeration).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Isiris to ensure future ads made sufficiently clear if strike-rate claims included bets that could return less money than was staked. We also told them to ensure they were in a position to substantiate their profit claims in future.