Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Do they exist? Some say yes and most seem to say no.
I have spent loads of time trying to find out for myself.
Using various methods and software I have come up with these.
All cover a five year period unless it says different below.
Profit to 1 pt level stake using betfair sp.
After deduction of 5% commission.
System 1
195 winners from 713 selections for profit of 221.85 points
System 2
88 winners from 314 selections for a profit of 124.12 points
System 3
128 winners from 454 selections for a profit of 160.10 points
System 4
304 winners from 634 selections for a profit of 138.52 points
System 5
289 winners from 802 selections for a profit of 211.38 points
System 6
61 winners from 265 selections for a profit of 115.92 points
System 7
47 winners from 186 selections for a profit of 102.34 points
System 8
30 winners from 112 selections for a profit of 47.99 points
System 9
63 winners from 193 selections for a profit of 42.19 points
System 10
422 winners from 1277 selections for a profit of 168.30 points
System 11
358 winners from 684 selections for a profit of 85.52 points
Some have quite small sample sizes but overall I think they look promising.
Hopefully results will continue to be as good going forward.
I have done the donkey work and now I think it's time to try and make some money.
I have not got a fortune to play with. I am not loaded like some on here!
I am pretty nervous but at the same time excited about this.
Here we go!
I have spent loads of time trying to find out for myself.
Using various methods and software I have come up with these.
All cover a five year period unless it says different below.
Profit to 1 pt level stake using betfair sp.
After deduction of 5% commission.
System 1
195 winners from 713 selections for profit of 221.85 points
System 2
88 winners from 314 selections for a profit of 124.12 points
System 3
128 winners from 454 selections for a profit of 160.10 points
System 4
304 winners from 634 selections for a profit of 138.52 points
System 5
289 winners from 802 selections for a profit of 211.38 points
System 6
61 winners from 265 selections for a profit of 115.92 points
System 7
47 winners from 186 selections for a profit of 102.34 points
System 8
30 winners from 112 selections for a profit of 47.99 points
System 9
63 winners from 193 selections for a profit of 42.19 points
System 10
422 winners from 1277 selections for a profit of 168.30 points
System 11
358 winners from 684 selections for a profit of 85.52 points
Some have quite small sample sizes but overall I think they look promising.
Hopefully results will continue to be as good going forward.
I have done the donkey work and now I think it's time to try and make some money.
I have not got a fortune to play with. I am not loaded like some on here!
I am pretty nervous but at the same time excited about this.
Here we go!
Show More
Chester.
Top weights 3yo Hcps Class 4 and 5.
Unfortunately it seems Chester Management have disposed with the Class 5.
Top weights 3yo Hcps Class 4 and 5.
Unfortunately it seems Chester Management have disposed with the Class 5.
Interesting thread with some interesting comments and observations. I am currently paper testing a form/odds system for 11 months that has produced a average 20ish points profit per month, whereas a stats based system ran along the same timeframe is showing a profit of 4.5 points per month.
But as posters have pointed out the past does not predict the future.
But as posters have pointed out the past does not predict the future.
A new recent addition to my ever growing database indicates the 4th highest rating in a 4 runner race is making a profit.
It doesn't happen often though.
Currently it's showing 33 points profit with 15 wins from 35 races.
4.45 Response - is the qualifier after the withdrawals.
The grade of race shows 4 wind from 11 (9 points profit) so not the best win ratio, but not the worst (Class 4)
It doesn't happen often though.
Currently it's showing 33 points profit with 15 wins from 35 races.
4.45 Response - is the qualifier after the withdrawals.
The grade of race shows 4 wind from 11 (9 points profit) so not the best win ratio, but not the worst (Class 4)
Nice win Murchu
Rob Hornby's first Brighton win this year (unless he's won a previous race today - not checked
Rob Hornby's first Brighton win this year (unless he's won a previous race today - not checked
Inherently the problem with ALL systems is they are back fitting the system to meet the objective of creating a system that "IF had been started at the given point where data was being collected from" would result in a winning system. No whilst it is possible that someone may stumble on the golden goose by such methods it is highly unlikely that such methods will continue to garner similar results in a different period of time.
The only way to have a profitable horse racing "system" IMO is to have consistently better analysing skills than the odds compilers(very easy) or market(here) and sufficiently so that it covers the overround and commission on here.
The only way to have a profitable horse racing "system" IMO is to have consistently better analysing skills than the odds compilers(very easy) or market(here) and sufficiently so that it covers the overround and commission on here.
Maybe Now Baby is the lowest of 4 in ratings for next at Brighton.
Inherently the problem with ALL systems is they are back fitting the system to meet the objective of creating a system that "IF had been started at the given point where data was being collected from" would result in a winning system.
Disagree...there is a difference between manipulating data to create a system (which is unlikely to prove profitable) and observing something you can profit from systematically in future...Nick Mordin's famous Cheltenham Fest Bumper System wasnt backfitting, it was purely an observation that horses that ran in the Chelt Fest Bumper were allowed to go off overpriced when switching to hurdling...the system was profitable until the betting market latched on too
Disagree...there is a difference between manipulating data to create a system (which is unlikely to prove profitable) and observing something you can profit from systematically in future...Nick Mordin's famous Cheltenham Fest Bumper System wasnt backfitting, it was purely an observation that horses that ran in the Chelt Fest Bumper were allowed to go off overpriced when switching to hurdling...the system was profitable until the betting market latched on too
Another non-runner in Quite Smart so that's the first day over
System 10
345 Brighton Voice Control Lost -1
415 Brighton Symphony Of Kings Won bsp 4.29
System 10 daily to bsp after 5% commission deducted on winnings +2.12
System 10
345 Brighton Voice Control Lost -1
415 Brighton Symphony Of Kings Won bsp 4.29
System 10 daily to bsp after 5% commission deducted on winnings +2.12
1.17 in commission, that is an extremely high rate...!
why would anyone try creating a system from back fitting,you have to come up with your own original idea, and then the system generates data and opportunities, around 1500/2500 opportunities per year, you could put any value you want on the unit value, multiply unit value by 1500/2000, you can get an estimate of potential earnings, generated by the system.
Hi Cork Langer
Two selections of which one won and the other lost
Winner returned at bsp of 4.29 which includes 1 point stake
4.29 returned less 1 stake = 3.29 gross profit on selection
3.29 with 5% deduction for commission = 3.12 net profit on selection
3.12 less 1 staked on loser = 2.12
I hope I have that right?
Two selections of which one won and the other lost
Winner returned at bsp of 4.29 which includes 1 point stake
4.29 returned less 1 stake = 3.29 gross profit on selection
3.29 with 5% deduction for commission = 3.12 net profit on selection
3.12 less 1 staked on loser = 2.12
I hope I have that right?
thanks for the link GG downloaded loads of them.cheers mate 
As has been mentioned 'back fitting' systems almost always fail as most don't have any logical reason to them. If you are creating using a system builder, exclude one year and work from there. You can then test the system on the excluded year.
murchu68
As a creator of a system myself ( 8 years ago), it is possible to make money at this game.
Keep your discipline, don't ' panic' when losing runs occur( as they will). To combat, make sure you have a large enough bank to accommodate. Stick to level stakes.
Good luck
As a creator of a system myself ( 8 years ago), it is possible to make money at this game.
Keep your discipline, don't ' panic' when losing runs occur( as they will). To combat, make sure you have a large enough bank to accommodate. Stick to level stakes.
Good luck
backing r moore, £30,ooo+ races,2 and 3 yr olds 106 pts profit,till injury, no bet under 5/2
,what has o brien done since,zilch.
,what has o brien done since,zilch.
Coming up with something from pure back fitting of data isn’t likely work, your analysis and testing needs to be more rigorous than that.
Yes plenty systems don’t work going forward as they have in the past, but people shouldn’t generalise and say none work because in my experience that isn’t the case, especially if you are using your own ratings.
Yes plenty systems don’t work going forward as they have in the past, but people shouldn’t generalise and say none work because in my experience that isn’t the case, especially if you are using your own ratings.
dross today,cl4 highest,j quin in profit,2.00 muss mdn?
Pawras - using your own ratings isn't a system it is something you have developed thats better than the market and odds compilers as stated in my post.
A "system" in my mind and most peoples would be using data that doesn't require subjective interpretation to formulate a method. Now I said its highly unlikely not impossible that such a method has any long term success.
Where people have a chance of succeeding IMO is where they are using their "better" interpretation skills which you seem to agree with in saying "especially if you use your own ratings"
A "system" in my mind and most peoples would be using data that doesn't require subjective interpretation to formulate a method. Now I said its highly unlikely not impossible that such a method has any long term success.
Where people have a chance of succeeding IMO is where they are using their "better" interpretation skills which you seem to agree with in saying "especially if you use your own ratings"
My system has a series of set key criteria. If a horse fits these key performance indicators it's a selection. If there are more that one qualifier, then a descending order of priority indicators highlight the actual bet.
It takes the emotive decision out of choice. There is no 'interpretation ' required.
It takes the emotive decision out of choice. There is no 'interpretation ' required.
For now I have just one selection for today
System 1
8.55 Kempton Major Valentine (showing best of 7/4 with bookies)
System 1
8.55 Kempton Major Valentine (showing best of 7/4 with bookies)
While not as straightforward as saying back stall A at course B if odds are at least C , but personally I would still view as a 'system' boiling down my view of a runners form into various ratings and then saying if xyz is true re those ratings/kpi's then bet.
That way the form is emotionlessly 'interpreted' the exact same way every time and I don’t interpret anything myself I just go with what the numbers say in my spreadsheet.
Personally I would view a system as anything where you perform a consistent set of steps to come to your selection, regardless of whether how simple or complex those steps are and whether there’s 1 or 100 of them.
Lol I remember a few years since on another forum people spending ages splitting hairs over the difference between an ‘approach’ and a ‘system’.
That way the form is emotionlessly 'interpreted' the exact same way every time and I don’t interpret anything myself I just go with what the numbers say in my spreadsheet.
Personally I would view a system as anything where you perform a consistent set of steps to come to your selection, regardless of whether how simple or complex those steps are and whether there’s 1 or 100 of them.
Lol I remember a few years since on another forum people spending ages splitting hairs over the difference between an ‘approach’ and a ‘system’.
I was reading my old man’s Racing Ahead magazine and it had a system in that I did some analysis on to see if it had any mileage, the rules were :-
ISP
ISP
I was reading my old man’s Racing Ahead magazine and it had a system in that I did some analysis on and the rules were :-
ISP less than or equal to 8/1
Won last time out
Course Winner
Has ran within 35 days
Has won at least one race in the last season
The last point was a hassle for me so I changed it to
Has won at least on race in the last year.
I applied those rules to all uk and ire races in 2014 and it resulted in
I would view this as a standard example of a system, it shows a loss at ISP but still better than most things I see published and it doesn’t take much tweakage to improve it into a profit rather than loss
ISP less than or equal to 8/1
Won last time out
Course Winner
Has ran within 35 days
Has won at least one race in the last season
The last point was a hassle for me so I changed it to
Has won at least on race in the last year.
I applied those rules to all uk and ire races in 2014 and it resulted in
| total bets | strike% | £1 level stakes profit/loss | roi% |
| 191 | 27.75 | -21.61 | -11.31 |
I would view this as a standard example of a system, it shows a loss at ISP but still better than most things I see published and it doesn’t take much tweakage to improve it into a profit rather than loss
pawras 26 Aug 15 11:15
While not as straightforward as saying back stall A at course B if odds are at least C , but personally I would still view as a 'system' boiling down my view of a runners form into various ratings and then saying if xyz is true re those ratings/kpi's then bet.
That way the form is emotionlessly 'interpreted' the exact same way every time and I don’t interpret anything myself I just go with what the numbers say in my spreadsheet.
Personally I would view a system as anything where you perform a consistent set of steps to come to your selection, regardless of whether how simple or complex those steps are and whether there’s 1 or 100 of them.
Totally agree
While not as straightforward as saying back stall A at course B if odds are at least C , but personally I would still view as a 'system' boiling down my view of a runners form into various ratings and then saying if xyz is true re those ratings/kpi's then bet.
That way the form is emotionlessly 'interpreted' the exact same way every time and I don’t interpret anything myself I just go with what the numbers say in my spreadsheet.
Personally I would view a system as anything where you perform a consistent set of steps to come to your selection, regardless of whether how simple or complex those steps are and whether there’s 1 or 100 of them.
Totally agree
has anyone got a better return over such a big sample as the dave evans 'system' i put up
I tried Clive Holts system in the 80's, didn't work.
A workmate of mine used to look in the Daily Mirror for Spotform rated 2 points clear, course and distance winner, used to get quite a few winners, but I wouldn't know if it was profitable or not.
He is a Car Salesman, so it would have been a waste of time asking him.
A workmate of mine used to look in the Daily Mirror for Spotform rated 2 points clear, course and distance winner, used to get quite a few winners, but I wouldn't know if it was profitable or not.
He is a Car Salesman, so it would have been a waste of time asking him.
ive got 16 months at a average of plus 20 points per month with more selections than dave evans but in less time.
Whatever happened to Adrian Massey's website? That site helped me create my own system for the NH that involves backing beaten favourites in certain races at certain tracks. It finished well ahead last season like it has done for every season I've used it. That website was such a useful tool for punters!
striding - that's impressive - but I can't reproduce it. I'm using my own data (so admit there may be errors - of data, and interpretation, but i think it' pretty ggod) - and I'm only using UK data not Irish), but I only have just over 200 races in my set for Evans in your specification. he's well inprofit this year, but shows a loss for the previous 3 years, for example, and a loss since 2008, with your spec (UK only).
july latest full month 341 selections 22.5 points profit
aug not counted number of selections but 36.5 points profit as of end of racing yesterday
All prior to commission.
aug not counted number of selections but 36.5 points profit as of end of racing yesterday
All prior to commission.
i used the not function ged for the odds, this is what it actually was built on
pd evans
jocks claim (0)
odds( industry sp) not between 1.02 and 11
pd evans
jocks claim (0)
odds( industry sp) not between 1.02 and 11
i think its the dates i thought i'd set them to 2008 like i usually do
is this the one you mean striding edge?
36% return for 3203 runners since 2008
this year been bonkers
when you say 36% return do you mean 36%ROI on BFSP odds or Industry SP odds?
or is that a 36% win strike rate?
36% return for 3203 runners since 2008
this year been bonkers
when you say 36% return do you mean 36%ROI on BFSP odds or Industry SP odds?
or is that a 36% win strike rate?
I took jockey 'not claim' to mean not claiming in the race. Is that what you mean?
If you want to compare dataset (and I'm not asking you to, I'm just curious), I have 30 UK qualifiers for the first 4 months of this year.
Race_Date Horse_Name
27/04/2015 Tango Sky
25/04/2015 Willaway
25/04/2015 Edgeoftheforest
23/04/2015 Jaganory
20/04/2015 Frivolous Lady
17/04/2015 Eshtyaaq
17/04/2015 Wordiness
17/04/2015 Nag's Wag
19/03/2015 Doctor Kehoe
18/03/2015 Jaganory
17/03/2015 Archie Stevens
14/03/2015 Carry On Deryck
10/03/2015 Telegraph
07/03/2015 Cheerio Sweetie
05/03/2015 Abba Zabba
04/03/2015 Alfaraaby
28/02/2015 Verse Of Love
21/02/2015 Verse Of Love
20/02/2015 Alfaraaby
17/02/2015 Cheerio Sweetie
13/02/2015 Severnwind
29/01/2015 Josie Joe
29/01/2015 Smugglers Lane
11/01/2015 Kodafine
07/01/2015 Telegraph
05/01/2015 La Estatua
05/01/2015 Aqlette
04/01/2015 Tamarin
03/01/2015 Hillgrove Angel
01/01/2015 Aqlette
If you want to compare dataset (and I'm not asking you to, I'm just curious), I have 30 UK qualifiers for the first 4 months of this year.
Race_Date Horse_Name
27/04/2015 Tango Sky
25/04/2015 Willaway
25/04/2015 Edgeoftheforest
23/04/2015 Jaganory
20/04/2015 Frivolous Lady
17/04/2015 Eshtyaaq
17/04/2015 Wordiness
17/04/2015 Nag's Wag
19/03/2015 Doctor Kehoe
18/03/2015 Jaganory
17/03/2015 Archie Stevens
14/03/2015 Carry On Deryck
10/03/2015 Telegraph
07/03/2015 Cheerio Sweetie
05/03/2015 Abba Zabba
04/03/2015 Alfaraaby
28/02/2015 Verse Of Love
21/02/2015 Verse Of Love
20/02/2015 Alfaraaby
17/02/2015 Cheerio Sweetie
13/02/2015 Severnwind
29/01/2015 Josie Joe
29/01/2015 Smugglers Lane
11/01/2015 Kodafine
07/01/2015 Telegraph
05/01/2015 La Estatua
05/01/2015 Aqlette
04/01/2015 Tamarin
03/01/2015 Hillgrove Angel
01/01/2015 Aqlette
add dates 2008 onward does give the profit as 36.84% but selections down to 2086
Well using the full data back to 2008, I have the following yearly figures
2008; -34
2009; +28
2010; -26
2011; -23
2012; -6
2013; -10
2014; -9
2015 +100 up to 23rd August)
2008; -34
2009; +28
2010; -26
2011; -23
2012; -6
2013; -10
2014; -9
2015 +100 up to 23rd August)
I've looked at all David Evans runners in UK and Ireland with an ISP > 10/1 and jockey allowance = 0
It has 109 selections this year showing an roi of 100.1% but losses in the previous years other than 2009. This is at ISP but as some of the ISP odds are very high (eg 50/1) I can imagine it could well get extremely high odds wins at betfair prices
I got 2082 runners from the start of 2008 to the start of this week so my criteria must be incorrect somehow.
It has 109 selections this year showing an roi of 100.1% but losses in the previous years other than 2009. This is at ISP but as some of the ISP odds are very high (eg 50/1) I can imagine it could well get extremely high odds wins at betfair prices
I got 2082 runners from the start of 2008 to the start of this week so my criteria must be incorrect somehow.
somehting is wrong there BFSP ROI's after 5% comm
2008 -12.61%
2009 71.05%
2010 36.17%
2011 -0.99%
2012 39.21%
2013 38.43%
2014 21.9%
2015 198.16%
overall 2086 wins 101 4.84% p/l bfsp 768.49 BFSP ROI 36.84%
2008 -12.61%
2009 71.05%
2010 36.17%
2011 -0.99%
2012 39.21%
2013 38.43%
2014 21.9%
2015 198.16%
overall 2086 wins 101 4.84% p/l bfsp 768.49 BFSP ROI 36.84%
there you go , you are using betfair sp not industry sp
not sure how you end up with more selections though
not sure how you end up with more selections though
i was going to take a punt on this back in july around goodwood but thought he'd had a ridiculous season and i'd probably missed the boat.
he's had 2 good winner since
obviously this year is an exception but i thought them figures made his long shots worthy of a look
like a plum i actually went against one this week, the outsider of the field of his beat mine into 2nd the pair miles clear
he's had 2 good winner since
obviously this year is an exception but i thought them figures made his long shots worthy of a look
like a plum i actually went against one this week, the outsider of the field of his beat mine into 2nd the pair miles clear
Place Dist Bt Stall Horse Age Weight Headgear OR Trainer Odds Jockey (Claim)
1st 3 Addicted To Luck 2 8-10 64 Evans, P D 25/1 Drowne, Steve
led 1f, led again over 1f out, ridden and ran on
2nd 0.75 8 Poets Song (IRE) 2 9-6 74 Tregoning, M P 9/4 Dwyer, Martin
dwelt, headway to lead after 1f, ridden and headed over 1f out, ran on
1st 3 Addicted To Luck 2 8-10 64 Evans, P D 25/1 Drowne, Steve
led 1f, led again over 1f out, ridden and ran on
2nd 0.75 8 Poets Song (IRE) 2 9-6 74 Tregoning, M P 9/4 Dwyer, Martin
dwelt, headway to lead after 1f, ridden and headed over 1f out, ran on
The bulk of the your profit is coming from the large difference between BFSP and SP on outsiders. The system is at a loss at SP since 2008, even taking this fine year into account.
Talking about systems - Therobster put up Di's Gift today
Now I use 3 ratings and two showed this one as there top rated, however the third used rating had it out of first 5 ratings.
So checking the win rate of the runners that had won out of the top five showed 5 wins from 7 races.
If it comes out OK then we can all see that the wins are over a mid -long distance, like today.
POS DIST
1 1m 3f
1 1m 1f
1 1m 4f
1 1m 4f
2 7f
6 7f
1 1m 4f
Systems are OK if there is a back up to support it.
Thankyou Robster.
Now I use 3 ratings and two showed this one as there top rated, however the third used rating had it out of first 5 ratings.
So checking the win rate of the runners that had won out of the top five showed 5 wins from 7 races.
If it comes out OK then we can all see that the wins are over a mid -long distance, like today.
POS DIST
1 1m 3f
1 1m 1f
1 1m 4f
1 1m 4f
2 7f
6 7f
1 1m 4f
Systems are OK if there is a back up to support it.
Thankyou Robster.
ged the whole point of the system is exaclty that this market is getting his outsiders wrong ?
the back up is the idea that the betfair market is too generous with this dodgy trainer who's runners are often as erratic as mark johnstons but given much better average prices.
all imo of course
all imo of course
using bsp minus -5% I get
year roi%
2008 -9.33
2009 51.99
2010 45.33
2011 -12.41
2012 30.62
2013 32.84
2014 15.89
I have more selections than prev because you get more of them at BSP > 10/1 than you do at ISP
I haven't downloaded the 2015 betfair data yet
year roi%
2008 -9.33
2009 51.99
2010 45.33
2011 -12.41
2012 30.62
2013 32.84
2014 15.89
I have more selections than prev because you get more of them at BSP > 10/1 than you do at ISP
I haven't downloaded the 2015 betfair data yet
something with a strike rate of about 5% isn't my cup of tea though
Gosden is well in profit (at SP) over the same period, using the same criteria.
no pawras it wont appeal to many
with any trainer they could suddenly go completely cold whatever the odds
it's the age old how much evidence are you happy to have a punt on
with any trainer they could suddenly go completely cold whatever the odds
it's the age old how much evidence are you happy to have a punt on
w haggas having a good year ,group wins 10+.tripled last year total
j gosden journey 33/1,won ,makes the roi look good.
Update since posting selections on here
Better odds available with bookies earlier as highlighted
To bsp after 5% commission deduction
System 10 +2.12
System 1 +1.27
Better odds available with bookies earlier as highlighted
To bsp after 5% commission deduction
System 10 +2.12
System 1 +1.27
Nothing yesterday but a fair few today assuming they all take their chance
System 4
240 Ffos Las Sheer Honesty
415 Nemarket Spirited Acclaim
700 Hamilton Nice Thoughts
System 5
415 Newmarket Spirited Acclaim
555 Hamilton A Lovable Rogue
System 7
440 Newcastle Sartori
System 9
605 Goodwood Carrington
System 10
455 Ffos Las Goodnightsuzy
510 Newcastle Secret Clause
640 Goodwood Brittlejohn
System 4
240 Ffos Las Sheer Honesty
415 Nemarket Spirited Acclaim
700 Hamilton Nice Thoughts
System 5
415 Newmarket Spirited Acclaim
555 Hamilton A Lovable Rogue
System 7
440 Newcastle Sartori
System 9
605 Goodwood Carrington
System 10
455 Ffos Las Goodnightsuzy
510 Newcastle Secret Clause
640 Goodwood Brittlejohn
How do you stake ? Levels ? Do you use one Bank to fund every bet with every system. Or is there a separate Bank to fund each System ?
Probably However, it's important. If using one Bank to cover all systems, one poor performing system could deplete the bank, potentially reducing stakes on other systems selections.
However, it's important. If using one Bank to cover all systems, one poor performing system could deplete the bank, potentially reducing stakes on other systems selections.
Update since posting selections on here
Better odds available with bookies earlier
To bsp after 5% commission deduction
Prior to today
System 10 +2.12
System 1 +1.27
Today
System 4 (overall today +0.18)
240 Ffos Las Sheer Honesty Won bsp 1.15
415 Nemarket Spirited Acclaim Lost -1.00
700 Hamilton Nice Thoughts Won bsp 2.10
System 5 (overall today -2.00)
415 Newmarket Spirited Acclaim Lost -1.00
555 Hamilton A Lovable Rogue Lost -1.00
System 7 (overall today -1.00)
440 Newcastle Sartori Lost -1.00
System 9 (overall today +2.19)
605 Goodwood Carrington Won bsp 3.31
System 10 (overall today +0.09)
455 Ffos Las Goodnightsuzy Lost -1.00
510 Newcastle Secret Clause Lost -1.00
640 Goodwood Brittlejohn Won bsp 3.20
Overall today -0.54
Running totals to carry forward
System 1 +1.27
System 4 +0.18
System 5 -2.00
System 7 -1.00
System 9 +2.19
System 10 +2.21
Overall +2.85
Better odds available with bookies earlier
To bsp after 5% commission deduction
Prior to today
System 10 +2.12
System 1 +1.27
Today
System 4 (overall today +0.18)
240 Ffos Las Sheer Honesty Won bsp 1.15
415 Nemarket Spirited Acclaim Lost -1.00
700 Hamilton Nice Thoughts Won bsp 2.10
System 5 (overall today -2.00)
415 Newmarket Spirited Acclaim Lost -1.00
555 Hamilton A Lovable Rogue Lost -1.00
System 7 (overall today -1.00)
440 Newcastle Sartori Lost -1.00
System 9 (overall today +2.19)
605 Goodwood Carrington Won bsp 3.31
System 10 (overall today +0.09)
455 Ffos Las Goodnightsuzy Lost -1.00
510 Newcastle Secret Clause Lost -1.00
640 Goodwood Brittlejohn Won bsp 3.20
Overall today -0.54
Running totals to carry forward
System 1 +1.27
System 4 +0.18
System 5 -2.00
System 7 -1.00
System 9 +2.19
System 10 +2.21
Overall +2.85
Hi Facts,
Apologies.
To put some flesh on the bones:
I have just one bank and all of my bets are staked from that.
I don't back every system bet. For example I am not comfortable betting at long odds on.
I don't place many bets at bsp as my stats show bigger profits are available by getting involved earlier.
In most cases the selections will be backed so playing earlier makes sense to me.
The point of this thread is to show that profits can be made from system bets at bsp.
Therefore I will continue to show p/l to all system selections to bsp.
Hopefully my own betting will be more profitable assuming previous trends continue.
In time I hope to find time to add more detail to the mechanics of the various systems.
Hope that makes sense.
Apologies.
To put some flesh on the bones:
I have just one bank and all of my bets are staked from that.
I don't back every system bet. For example I am not comfortable betting at long odds on.
I don't place many bets at bsp as my stats show bigger profits are available by getting involved earlier.
In most cases the selections will be backed so playing earlier makes sense to me.
The point of this thread is to show that profits can be made from system bets at bsp.
Therefore I will continue to show p/l to all system selections to bsp.
Hopefully my own betting will be more profitable assuming previous trends continue.
In time I hope to find time to add more detail to the mechanics of the various systems.
Hope that makes sense.
it does to me murcho.
Fair play on the thread.
I love this type of thing myself.
But you could be making all this up and having lucky guesses.
You have 11 systems up so throw one at us and we can back check it and if it stacks up then brilliant. Ok hope you take this up it will massively boost your credibility.
Fair play on the thread.
I love this type of thing myself.
But you could be making all this up and having lucky guesses.
You have 11 systems up so throw one at us and we can back check it and if it stacks up then brilliant. Ok hope you take this up it will massively boost your credibility.
Thanks for your reply.. Couple more questions if I may.
1) average winning sp by System ?
2) longest losing run, by System ?
Thanks
1) average winning sp by System ?
2) longest losing run, by System ?
Thanks
Semi related, semi unrelated post. Has anyone done a study on how much bf sp would be affected by betting more? The idea that studies using bf sp as a constant seem a little far from the truth as surely more bet at bf sp would result in a lower bf sp. I'm not sure how much it would be affected but it is a glorified tote system in essence so I'm sure these margins would be reduced if playing with real bets and any scaling up of bets would reduce margins further.
Apologies in advance if said figures are for real bets. I always prefer to look at margins based on "actual" bets placed coupled with the stakes involved.
eg; I think I could easily show margins of 50-60% profit to stake based on getting a few quid on at the overnight horse odds with 365, PP, Hills, fred etc but does it mean anything?
Apologies in advance if said figures are for real bets. I always prefer to look at margins based on "actual" bets placed coupled with the stakes involved.
eg; I think I could easily show margins of 50-60% profit to stake based on getting a few quid on at the overnight horse odds with 365, PP, Hills, fred etc but does it mean anything?
class 4 below handicaps,dross,class 3 above not bad,trainers have favoured courses,and jockeys,if u filter,that in you will do better,gl
yeah I'm interested to know the strike rate and average winning odds of your system, for example also in system 11 you state 358 winners from 684 selections, what time period was that over?
I agree with facts though, you have to be careful using one bank because one system going T&ts up can be a big negative if not using pure levels stakes
I agree with facts though, you have to be careful using one bank because one system going T&ts up can be a big negative if not using pure levels stakes
murcho68
I assume you continually scrutinise the results of each system. As a consequence you must have highlighted common factors that relate more to losers than winners, and as a result 'weeded' out these out ?
I assume you continually scrutinise the results of each system. As a consequence you must have highlighted common factors that relate more to losers than winners, and as a result 'weeded' out these out ?
Have you run any statistical significance tests, I suggest you do before starting to bet
Saturday selections
System 4
345 Goodwood Kodi Bear (showing 8/11 with bookies)
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies)
System 5
605 Windsor Critical Risk (showing 7/4 with bookies)
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies)
System 4
345 Goodwood Kodi Bear (showing 8/11 with bookies)
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies)
System 5
605 Windsor Critical Risk (showing 7/4 with bookies)
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies)
doh 5 years, helps if I open my eyes
yeah weeding can save you a lot of money
yeah weeding can save you a lot of money
To answer at least some of the questions
Average winning bsp you already have (total selections plus profit divided by number of winners)
Longest losing run by system (followed by longest winning run in brackets)
System 1 = 15 (4) *53%
System 2 = 11 (3) *55%
System 3 = 20 (4) *56%
System 4 = 9 (8) *71%
System 5 = 11 (7) *59%
System 6 = 21 (3) *50%
System 7 = 13 (5) *45%
System 8 = 15 (3) *56%
System 9 = 13 (6) *53%
System 10 = 17 (9) *60%
System 11 = 8 (8) *76%
*with % figures shows win and place SR for anyone interested
Average winning bsp you already have (total selections plus profit divided by number of winners)
Longest losing run by system (followed by longest winning run in brackets)
System 1 = 15 (4) *53%
System 2 = 11 (3) *55%
System 3 = 20 (4) *56%
System 4 = 9 (8) *71%
System 5 = 11 (7) *59%
System 6 = 21 (3) *50%
System 7 = 13 (5) *45%
System 8 = 15 (3) *56%
System 9 = 13 (6) *53%
System 10 = 17 (9) *60%
System 11 = 8 (8) *76%
*with % figures shows win and place SR for anyone interested
kodi bear ,positive,critical risk positive a kirby, dew pond negative,class trainer jockey gl
So if you Bank was 50 points( stakes 1 pt), and selections all came consecutively from System 1,2,3 and 4, and these all coincided with their respective LLR - you'd be wiped out.
you must have positive , on trainer and jockey, and less bets.
and less bets.
although entirely possible it's something of a statistical outlier to hit the longest losing run on all four systems at the same time, plus it would also depend only maintaining a 50 pt bank or all hitting the LLR for all four at the start, plus if they're anything like my various ones there's often a certain overlap between one or more systems.
Saturday selections
System 4 (-0.17 on day)
345 Goodwood Kodi Bear (showing 8/11 with bookies) Won bsp 1.88
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
System 5 (-2.00 on day)
605 Windsor Critical Risk (showing 7/4 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
Carry forward
System 1 = +1.27
System 4 = +0.01
System 5 = -4.00
System 7 = -1.00
System 9 = +2.19
System 10 = +2.21
Overall = +0.68
System 4 (-0.17 on day)
345 Goodwood Kodi Bear (showing 8/11 with bookies) Won bsp 1.88
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
System 5 (-2.00 on day)
605 Windsor Critical Risk (showing 7/4 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
720 Redcar Dew Pond (showing 4/1 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
Carry forward
System 1 = +1.27
System 4 = +0.01
System 5 = -4.00
System 7 = -1.00
System 9 = +2.19
System 10 = +2.21
Overall = +0.68
Sunday Selections
System 4
150 Beverley Gamesters Lad (showing 5/1 with bookies)
System 10
210 Yarmouth Lady Nayef (showing 33/1 with bookies)
325 Beverley Don't Call Me (showing 11/10 with bookies)
System 4
150 Beverley Gamesters Lad (showing 5/1 with bookies)
System 10
210 Yarmouth Lady Nayef (showing 33/1 with bookies)
325 Beverley Don't Call Me (showing 11/10 with bookies)
When I first started backing horses, I asked an old timer for the secret of making a profit. He told me with a wink;- ''Son, it's easy. Just put a lot on the winners and a little on the losers''
I took the hint and realised that it's all to do with luck at the end of the day. Good luck, all the same.
I took the hint and realised that it's all to do with luck at the end of the day. Good luck, all the same.
Sunday Selections
System 4 (-1.00 today)
150 Beverley Gamesters Lad (showing 5/1 with bookies) 3rd -1.00
System 10 (-2.00 today)
210 Yarmouth Lady Nayef (showing 33/1 with bookies) Lost -1.00
325 Beverley Don't Call Me (showing 11/10 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
Carried forward
System 1 +1.27
System 4 -0.99
System 5 -4.00
System 7 -1.00
System 9 +2.19
System 10 +0.21
Overall -2.32
System 4 (-1.00 today)
150 Beverley Gamesters Lad (showing 5/1 with bookies) 3rd -1.00
System 10 (-2.00 today)
210 Yarmouth Lady Nayef (showing 33/1 with bookies) Lost -1.00
325 Beverley Don't Call Me (showing 11/10 with bookies) 2nd -1.00
Carried forward
System 1 +1.27
System 4 -0.99
System 5 -4.00
System 7 -1.00
System 9 +2.19
System 10 +0.21
Overall -2.32
Monday Selection
System 4
535 Chepstow Dandys Perier (showing best odds 4/1 with bookies)
System 4
535 Chepstow Dandys Perier (showing best odds 4/1 with bookies)
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539