PRICEWISE 59 losers in a row

When the racing post is in bed with most bookmakers, price wise "tipping" all those losers would be in agreement with the philosophy of both parties,therefore tom Segal's position will never be untenable judging by his results.

I think the reality of the situation is that Pricewise is largely irrelevant  to bookmakers win or lose . There can't be much doubt that the machines have brought in more money than his 59 losers - and if he starts to win again the happy sound of machines eating tens and twenties will help them forget the pain - the main reason I don't want him to win is that I don't want to see Simon Clare et al given a  platform to spout their rubbish about losing a fortune

Martyn Ford from Ascot is pretty quiet on this fred.

it has to be in the 90s of losers if you put in the extras and tom on sundays...
never know today may be the start of a rescue mission , the extra is 5.10 cork deadly catch

it is true that Tom's hands are tied to a degree as he has to bet in certain races, also there seems to be a restriction on tipping more than 1pt win or 1pt e/w. I'm sure he would go more points on certain bets if he was allowed. Having said that Ben Linfoot is tipping in exactly the same way as Tom does and makes consistent profits

@the bloob -- Sir Tom does not use the points system because no-one would be able to get 10 points on.

28 straight losers.

last win 8/8/15,the character, £5 ew 15.0,return £12.50p

deadbrain59 - That is known as desperation. Highlighting a 1/4 "winner"

Seagull could stop a Eurostar at the moment!!

2nd again

You freaks are missing the point in stating that he has to select in certain races..

He can cherrypick the top price which is unavailable anyhow..

As regards the alleged £100k he is on (and I have stated repeatedly that Steve Palmer is on the same and more) there are many people that could produce a profit given his circumstances and all available information..

Indeed I would shoot myself if I had a losing run of more that 10 losers given the advantages that he has...

Just a Thought...

Indeed I would shoot myself if I had a losing run of more that 10 losers given the advantages that he has...

You provide the tips, I'll provide the gun..............

I have my own gun fella..

Just in case..

Pricewise races aren't a tough job not sure why people think it is ... you have got stats printed ... trainers comments... loads of info/insights...  that you don't get in the day to day racing - that makes Saturday racing (or big days) special... all he has to do is fit pieces of the jigsaw... if you go 59 losers and counting... need to reflect on yourself as a tipster and maybe time for a break ... not take everyone off a cliff with you...

will he lose his knighthood

59  losers on the bounce.  my odds 500/1 you could not do that throwing a dart  at the racing post pinned up on the wall ......

Must be influencing decision making and sure will be pressure from you know who. By the way has the RP shrunk again? No bigger than my Beano.

homefortea     30 Aug 15 20:02 

You freaks are missing the point in stating that he has to select in certain races..



As regards the alleged £100k he is on (and I have stated repeatedly that Steve Palmer is on the same and more) there are many people that could produce a profit given his circumstances and all available information..





You're the freak, if you think Seagull and Palmer are on £100k salaries. Utter nonsense.

he's like a 'king stuck record with that £100K rubbish.

send in the clowns

more golden nuggets from monsieur pullien in sat post,
just because city are 5 points[ now 8] in front of chelsea doesnt mean they are a better team,all you,ve got to ask yourself is over the 35 games that are left can chelsea take 6 more points than city,i dont think so and the current title odds are about right,thanks for that kev
he was going on to say he didnt think c helsea could because city were the better team but ran out of space,

palmer could be on over 50k but to be only living in very mediocre approx 200k house in weymouth with the decor and furniture it has and not be able to afford a 5k bank he'd have to be pretty much blowing all his money in corals every month and be up to his eye balls in loans, credit cards etc.

59 losers is just SH&T

User McCoy Carp • August 29, 2015 7:12 PM BST
A run like this is inevitable bearing in mind the price of the horses he selects but it doesn't make it any easier to stomach. He or The Racing Post should offer some insight and explaination as to why these losing runs happen as how you deal with them is THE most important thing in becoming a successful punter. Goodwood use to be my favourite place to bet at, then this year I went through 1 winner out of 80 selections and they wern't all big priced runners like Segal tips. I lost £7500 there including £3500 at the main meeting. I would never have thought a run like that was possible. One saving grace with me now is I don't chase, but it's taken me a long time to become disciplined in that way.
I am constantly searching the net for help with these losing runs and at the moment have started reading "The Drunkards Walk" which Hugh taylor recommended - but it's quite hard work. It's the despair you feel, lack of info and people to talk to when you hit these runs.
Don't assume he's near to tipping a winner. Look at that losing run Mark Jonhston went through over the winter, 100+ runners and no winner. One of the most incredible things to have ever happened in racing yet more or less ignored by the press.
But then look at the summer he has had and how things have changed!

this business about him having to tip in certain races is a red herring...he's ALWAYS had to tip in certain races and was fine for the last decade...

the question now is whether his current form is merely a statistical blip to be expected at some point during 10+ yrs of tipping long-priced runners or whether he's lost his mojo for good   

it has happened to successful tipsters before, Mel Collier and Henry Ricks were successful over a long period of time and then lost the plot

just for the record m jonhston,has only had 1 group winner all season.

Ilikewavingatbuses

Whatever method you use to bet on horses, a long losing run is inevitable. But as long as you are using level stakes to bet, and you  are using the same disciplined criteria to choose your selections ( and have years worth of records to show these criteria work ), then winners will invariably arrive.
The secret is to have a sufficiently large enough Racing Bank to accommodate the losing runs, without it hurting ( and thereby reducing your confidence, and creating ' panic ' betting ).

Stick to what has worked in the past, don't deviate, don't chase, don't be tempted  to do ' silly / fun ' bets.

ryan moore shows big profits,£30,000+ races,although he wont ride again this season,as does w mullins and p nicolls.

Aug 31, 2015 -- 11:59AM, Facts wrote:

IlikewavingatbusesWhatever method you use to bet on horses, a long losing run is inevitable. But as long as you are using level stakes to bet, and you  are using the same disciplined criteria to choose your selections ( and have years worth of records to show these criteria work ), then winners will invariably arrive. The secret is to have a sufficiently large enough Racing Bank to accommodate the losing runs, without it hurting ( and thereby reducing your confidence, and creating ' panic ' betting ). Stick to what has worked in the past, don't deviate, don't chase, don't be tempted  to do ' silly / fun ' bets.

Couldnt agree more Facts, level stake is the ONLY way to win long term imo. I'm sure there are one or two instances where its proven not so but throwing 20 quid then 100 then 250 is only going to end in heartbreak.

Yes the smaller the % bank youre willing the risk the better.

Discipline is the hardest thing for a punter to acquire and the reason most fail imo.

level stake is the ONLY way to win long term imo


just not true

Yep

To wavingatbuses

Duncan

It's the true test( in the long run ) of any betting methodology you may use.

in competition thread div 3,reged would be making comments about toms picks

iyo, Facts...it would be a much less profitable way of going about it for me

Non level stakes can be more profitable but they're usually far more fragile to your avg win odds/strike rate not panning out as expected.

duncan

Not just my opinion. Widely acknowledged by professional punters both here and in the States.

I've had bigger wins via non level stakes bets, but they're not as sustainable long term, as level stakes

if using a non level stakes , e.g. a % bank approach, it can be interesting to randomise the sequence of bets and see how the bottom line changes each time you randomise the sequence

just a little question,what happens if it turns out your winning runs were the blip and losing runs the norm, how long do you carry on betting waiting for a non excistent turn in your fortunes,

I guess its not really about Tom... its about the RP - the quality of info they get being "In the know"...

What I know from betting is a small snippet of info is crucial and can make a massive difference to your P&L - I have noticed RP getting lazier with its reporting for me not thorough enough as it was few years back... think they troll forums for insights rather than talking to stables building links with the racing fraternity... and only represent the racing insight from a perspective of over indulgent reporting on racing egos.

As for Tom he needs to go for a start - I always felt you cant tip if your paymaster is a bookie... he lost his credibility as far as I'm concerned when he joined Ladbrokes... people who back his selections are just adding dividends to Laddies!

been betting 30 yrs...that's long term enough for me...doesnt make sense to me to have the same stake on one you think is 10% bigger odds than it should be as one you think is 50% bigger odds than it should be

and vica versa of course what happens if you started off on a losing run and give up ,when in fact a little paitence would have landed you on a winning formulea,,
wheres it proven that winning systems start off with a winning run,if segal or taylor had started off with one of these long losing runs presumably we,d have nevr heard about their good winning runs

Anybody who reads Segal’s weekly column in the Weekender knows that the guy is a guesser. Every week he keeps coming up with drivel whose knowledge would not better any newbie to the sport.
He says he does not do speed figures or compile his own handicap and has never indicated time spent in the paddock. His race reading skills are no better than the average punter. He does not compute his own tissue. His only edge as such is he avoids overbet horses who may have gone up too much in the handicap. Hardly the basis for his huge following. You can forget any statistical analysis of his record. The simple fact is the man lacks expertise in any area. Follow him at your peril.

I think Duncan Idaho is spot on. Your stake on any bet must reflect how much value you think you are getting. If on any given bet you felt there was great value it would be a missed opportunity not to try and cash in . Contrary to a lot that's written there is no such the value - there's my value and your value - and by applying what we think in that regard we try to get ourselves in front . If you have what you consider a value bet - you must act in the knowledge that the where and when of your next value bet is  uncertain

The game is full of punters who have found a method that generates a level-stake profit. The only thing that keeps them losing is their wilful refusal actually to bet to level stakes.

On a separate note, recognizing the difference between a losing run that is a blip and one that signifies that your method is no longer working owing to changed circumstances is one of the hardest decisions a full-timer has to make. It's simply no good to assume that your method has been sound in the past and that the future and your betting bank will take care of themselves. Life changes and the game changes with it.

you can easily have a sound selection process that makes a reasonable roi% with pure level stakes, however yes you can make more money by staking according to your view of their value but your view of their value doesn't have to very far out for you to then lose money by staking according to that view.

I recall reading that Tom does do his own speed ratings.
I also recall reading that the chap that does the racing post ratings(handicap) does not bet. (Steve Mason I think)

Staking should reflect the difficulty of the race and the horse you fancy. If you fancy a horse in a Maiden or a Stakes race you might make it a 6/4 shot - you therefore bet 40 Units. In a tough handicap you may make it a 4/1 shot. You therefore bet 20 Units and so on.

Unless you make zero effort to shop around, most punters will be effectively betting to a marginally underround book these days. Bet to level stakes and you must have a reasonable chance of turning out a profit over a long enough period.

The fact that most don't is down to the throwaway tenner on the 20/1 winner in a race full of dangers being followed by an even monkey on the certainty which jettisons Ruby Walsh at the last.

surely by identiying so called value,[ personaly a very subjective subject ], the bigger the rick made by bookmakers [ ie the bigger the value in your opinion] the bigger the bet,whats the point in having the same size bet where you think the bookies made a small rick as compared to when you thinks he,s made a huge rick
in the old days was known as the bigger the odds the bigger the bet,the pro,s now alegedly  put these odds down to someone knowing something they dont and instead of increasing their wager they leave well alone

Stow
Are you sure about the SF's?
I cant recall a single occasion where he has said something like 'based on my speed figures I fancy... etc. I more than happy to defer if I am wrong.

over the last few months he,s thrown into write ups little snippets like , he,s giving up
working out the draw
betting on the ground ,good horses go on most ground etc
so he,s basicaly only backing horses that he thinks are chucked in,hence why lots of his tips are predicted well in advance on here

yes, there was a transcript in the post a no. of years ago of interviews with both of them. I probably have it tucked away somewhere

Thanks Stow
I am much relieved !!!

% of the Bank is same as level stakes  in my book. Let's say it's 2%  and your bank is £1000. That's commencing  stakes of £20 - to sustain a LLR of 50. If the Bank increase to £2000, your 2% now equates to stakes of  £40 - still allowing a LLR of 50. The stakes increase when Bank does, they never decrease. So after a LR , when the winner arrives your re still on at the same stake.

Betting to ' value' is something I personally don't  cater for. If my selection fits my kpi 's it's a bet, whether it's 3/1  or. 10/1.
Although my priority of bets ( only H'caps) is with Class 1 - 3 races at Grade 1 courses. I will also be ( if rules fit) to a selection running in a Class 6 race at Pontefract. Over many years of keeping records, I have found that in the long run , it pays to bet where the criteria fits. I've looked at reducing bets and betting only in higher grade races. But over time bigger profits accrue by including lower grade races too. I know this approach wouldn't suit many on here, but by adhering rigidly to the 'system' it removes the 'emotiveness ' of choice, which often ( in my experience ) can lead you to either back the wrong horse, or have more or less money on. As I say, this won't find agreement, but it works for me. And as a result the last 9 years of betting, have produced very different results than the previous 30 !

What if all your kpi's were met except the price facts. What is it was 11/4 instead of 3/1?

if

toms not well
taking him to doctors in morning
its bad
2 nd itis
please god he lives

your a bookmaker or bookies rep obviously,

I'd have looked as early as possible when prices came up. Would wait if 11/4 was the best, to see if it drifted. Nearer the race time. If 11/4 was strong, I'd take it. But not any lower. Average  price of winners over a year comes out around 6/1. So majority of bets are greater than 3/1.

I was thinking you'd say if 11/4 you wouldn't take it. Was going to say, well you're catering for value subconsciously, but you never!

ilikewavingatbuses

ilikewavingatbuses
31 Aug 15 11:22
Joined: 06 Jun 09
| Topic/replies: 29,374 | Blogger: ilikewavingatbuses's blog
User McCoy Carp • August 29, 2015 7:12 PM BST
A run like this is inevitable bearing in mind the price of the horses he selects but it doesn't make it any easier to stomach. He or The Racing Post should offer some insight and explaination as to why these losing runs happen as how you deal with them is THE most important thing in becoming a successful punter. Goodwood use to be my favourite place to bet at, then this year I went through 1 winner out of 80 selections and they wern't all big priced runners like Segal tips. I lost £7500 there including £3500 at the main meeting. I would never have thought a run like that was possible. One saving grace with me now is I don't chase, but it's taken me a long time to become disciplined in that way.
I am constantly searching the net for help with these losing runs and at the moment have started reading "The Drunkards Walk" which Hugh taylor recommended - but it's quite hard work. It's the despair you feel, lack of info and people to talk to when you hit these runs.
Don't assume he's near to tipping a winner. Look at that losing run Mark Jonhston went through over the winter, 100+ runners and no winner. One of the most incredible things to have ever happened in racing yet more or less ignored by the press.
But then look at the summer he has had and how things have changed!

Laugh
What part of this do you find funny exactly?

m johnston turf 2011 -£244,45,
                2012 -£ 63,25,
                2013 -£278,13.
                2014-£207,74.
                2015+£ 42,44.

Him and Hannon been my best source of profit this year.

Facts I am not sure of you..

Keep profit records of course but what has something that happened ten years ago have to do with today...

I cannot get on anymore with any firm (yawn) and so rarely bet apart from a scutch of triple the odds one winner guaranteed prices Lucky 15's on Saturdays and festivals in the shops..

The Seagull had the right approach...

Access to the best prices, trainer in form,trainer notes in the rancid paper before it was published and complete access to the rp database..

But it is not happening for the lazy ba stard and he should put a bit more work into it.Times are changing

It's not  profit records that happened 10 years ago It's reassurance that what happened 10 years ago, happened 9 years ago, 8 years ago, 7,6,5,4 etc, etc. I.e that the ' rules ' of selection choice,are as relevant today as they historically have been since they were first devised. hth.

Not sure as I am yesterdays man as regards betting and the rules are changing all the time..

Lucky I banked enough and never went wild in my halcyon days...

McCoy Carp
     31 Aug 15 17:39   









ilikewavingatbuses

ilikewavingatbuses
31 Aug 15 11:22
Joined: 06 Jun 09
| Topic/replies: 29,374 | Blogger: ilikewavingatbuses's blog
User McCoy Carp • August 29, 2015 7:12 PM BST
A run like this is inevitable bearing in mind the price of the horses he selects but it doesn't make it any easier to stomach. He or The Racing Post should offer some insight and explaination as to why these losing runs happen as how you deal with them is THE most important thing in becoming a successful punter. Goodwood use to be my favourite place to bet at, then this year I went through 1 winner out of 80 selections and they wern't all big priced runners like Segal tips. I lost £7500 there including £3500 at the main meeting. I would never have thought a run like that was possible. One saving grace with me now is I don't chase, but it's taken me a long time to become disciplined in that way.
I am constantly searching the net for help with these losing runs and at the moment have started reading "The Drunkards Walk" which Hugh taylor recommended - but it's quite hard work. It's the despair you feel, lack of info and people to talk to when you hit these runs.
Don't assume he's near to tipping a winner. Look at that losing run Mark Jonhston went through over the winter, 100+ runners and no winner. One of the most incredible things to have ever happened in racing yet more or less ignored by the press.
But then look at the summer he has had and how things have changed!

Laugh
What part of this do you find funny exactly?


You had 80 bets in 5 days 35 races so average of over 2 picks a race,yet you weren't chssing and expected to win,think it's pretty obvious why he was laughing...

thegiggilo -

I read it as 80 bets at ALL Goodwood meetings this year -

Hence - Just 1 Winner giving, "a £7,500 loss," (at around £100 per bet) -

- and a, "£3,500 at the main meeting," (at £100 per race).

^ * and a, "£3,500 LOSS at the main meeting,"

Don't think it really make's that much difference even if he mean't that..

The best tipster of the modern era once went around 70 selections without a winner...hey, sh*t happens!

70 Or a 1000 losers makes little difference how good or bad results are unless you're betting them yourself and using your own money,it a million on any of these tipsters make a success of punting infact I wouldn't even be sure they even bet...

How many tipsters are winning at sp or have ever won at sp over a large sample of bets over x amount of years,zilch..

How many tipsters are winning at sp or have ever won at sp over a large sample of bets over x amount of years,zilch..

Given the effect Sir Tom and Sir Hugh have on the price, that is hardly relevant to judging their ability. Lesser known tipsters might, until their record becomes widely appreciated and then they too will shorten SP.

I've never been a winning punter, but this year, I decided to spend a lot of time at it, subscribe to a ratings system and record all my bets. I play in a lot of races and sometimes bet 2 or 3 in a race. Before I went on the losing run at Goodwood, my last winning bet there was King To Be, 2nd May, £120 @ 6.07 placed on here. I'm not going to recount them, but I think I had 63 consecutive losers there before Belvoir Bay scored for me at the main meeting, £80 @ 6/1 (888) then another 17 or so losers for me until Brittleton won on 28/8, £349.84 to £200 on here after commission, won 2/1.
I use a "variable" level stakes plan, with £250 on an even money shot (think I've probably had 2 of these all year, one won, one lost)£200 @ 5/4, £100 @ 2/1-3/1, £80, 7-2 - 7/1, £60 9/1,10/1, £50, 11/1-20/1, £40, 25/1, £30 33/1 etc. This isn't hard and fast, sometimes I will double my bet if I'm strong on one or put more on if the horse drifts.
My 2 biggest bets this year were Osaila at Royal Ascot, which I came on here and told everyone about beforehand, £200 ew @ 14/1 and £100 win, just got up on the line to win @ 13/2 and Fields Of Athenry, same bet @ 11/1 which luckily for me, 365 & Coral paid 5 places.
I've also had £500 win on Air Force Blue for the 2000 Guineas.
My yearly figures are:
Jan: £+3645.49
Feb: £-2396.25
March: £-1913.71 (inc: Cheltenham festival, lost £2509.52)
April: £+7758.17
May: £-130.07
June: £+1767.96
July: £-1319.80
August: £+4604.49
For the average stakes I'm betting at I thought a £5000 bank would be enough, but it's not. Although the above figures don't show it, there's a period where I went from being £11000 up on the year, to less than £3000 up.
SJ closed my account more or less straight away, Boyles have effectively done the same (when I try to place a bet it comes up, "a risk assessment has rejected your bet" or something like that) I'm restricted to "recreational" betting (whatever that means)with Betway, & limited stakes with most of the others apart from 365, BV, Coral, & 888 - the last two named, bets often get referred to traders but normally taken for my average stakes I want to get on.
If you mainly play outside of the short priced range, which I do, then you are incredibly naive if you think that a losing run like Segals or my Goodwood run won't happen and how you get through them, is in my opinion the key to becoming a successful punter.
Any other questions feel free to ask.

As I've stated before. The key to not letting the inevitable long losing run, is to have a sufficiently large enough Racing Bank. I bet level stakes ( a fixed % of the Bank). I personally would not subscribe to variable stakes. As to putting large amounts on short priced Favs. - road to ruin imo.

Good luck with your betting McCoy, you're obviously doing something right. Keep detailed records of type of bets, reasons for selection, race types etc. look for positive patterns, and weed out the negatives. Personally I think you're betting on too many horses in all sorts of different races. Be disciplined and selective.
Good luck again

Mccoy Carp, that betting bank is way too small for those stakes. I would suggest your betting bank should be at least 5 times bigger to be betting those stakes.
Have a read of this website

http://www.learnbetwin.com/betting-bank-and-bankroll-management/

Well actually double the betting bank would be ok for your normal bets but the 200 e/w on 14/1 does seem a bit risky to me. Otherwise looks like you're doing ok.

My stakes are 2% of my bank  - a 50th.

Yes that should be ok facts, all depends on what edge you have and strike rate. If you had say 20% winners at average odds 5/1 then that would be about right.

Not far off Stevie, a tad better strike rate, and around a point higher average odds.

Apart from Cheltenham, I very rarely bet on the jumps and stick to the flat. If things go as plan, then I intend to be out of the country when Cheltenham is on next year year. I don't want to get caught up again in all that hype, nonsense & those Walsh/Mullins horses going in left right & centre at odds to my mind you can't back them at.
Yes, you are probably right FACTS, I probably do bet in too many races, but it works for me.
At the moment I have about £10k scattered around different bookmaking accounts (after a good August) and another £10k I could draw on if necessary to bet with - hopefully it won't come to that.
My stakes are on average £80-£100 and I'm happy with variable level stakes. I don't make many bets below 2/1, maybe 3/1, & apart from photo finishes, stewards enquiries, I have had 2 odds on bets this year, one, a horse match bet and the other a horse to finish in the 1st 3 - they both lost. I might not back so much on the longer priced selections but the staking is still weighted in their favour, and when you do hit the inevitable losing run, your bank is a bit more protected than pure level stakes. If I see, what I think is a major rick, then I'm going to have more on, like in the case of Osaila. I intend to see the year out, & evaluate things after that, as regards staking. This is not a full time thing for me, (I run a seasonal business as well) even though I spend hours at it. Good luck.

Sounds good.

Fair enough mccoy carp if you felt it was a major rick then you were probably right to have that amount on as long as you don't over estimate your edge. As you have money in reserve as well then I think your staking plan looks fine though as you say this is your first year making a profit then best to be cautious imo. GL

Whats todays selection anyone?

Findyerown Hamilton 5.05

I read earlier that a Brazilian jockey had a 89 losing streak last year and looks like winning the UK championship this year.

The main man..... SDS..... there is only a few that you can trust like him.....

Does anyone keep records of sir tom's selections each year?  Interesting to know how much up or down he is this year to a £1 stake and considering he had a 40/1 winner in the Scottish national I wonder if he is still in credit

Put a call out for crackerpants, Sprinter, he'll know.

-94.5 pts, source - betting tools

Thanks djembadjembahighvoltage betting tools very useful site cheers no wonder the bookies are always flagging up pricewise selections!!

He's due 

SDS manages to lose when I back him

had him yesterday for a 4-timer

2nd

duncan idaho    02 Sep 15 10:09 
He's due 


Bit like the VAT man who turned up once every three years