Fineform and Clive Holt

Very informative,taken the stakes to be placed at the given odds,giving an idea similar to the Kelly criterion,but on presented odds.

It's on the shelf so I must have read it at once, a long time ago, though I can't remember it in any detail apart from it started with his going pro after amassing a number of unopened pay packets, itself a sign of its age! The basic method was counting (or adding?) the form figures, wasn't it?

something like that ramruna, so many points for a win last time out , 2nd last time out, course winner , distance winner etc but i cant remember the exact details.

Winner last time out - 5 poits
second - 3 points
third - 2 points
fourth - 1 point

C&D winner = 3 points
Distance winner = 1 point

Its on my shelf too, with the Tony Peach VDW pamphlets directly below!

I still remember my excitement buying the book, thought at the time that it was my way out of a career of boring accountancy....it wasnt


still, as you say its a good starting point.

So many horses just do not want to win and the rare ones that do run up sequences. The real triers like Dashel drasher for instance

zzzorro, was it also 2pts for a course winner?

1 pt for a course winner.

All applied to the horses last two races.

A good book but I prefer Come Fly With The Butterfly by John Mort Green.

Butterfly -- stay off the booze and ignore the cover picture of the author with two bottles of Moet!

2 meetings ago Cheltenham did a yankee rare for me 3 out of 4 won as i remembered course winners sometimes tend to do well at cheltenham and it looked a trappy day so plan b was used i first used the method when i had a 8/1 cheltenham winner 30 years ago with 100 on it lol and thanks to fineform i occasionally use it, clive had a nice place just outside Middlenham he was at most northern tracks every day

I remember the adverts for this book were very enticing each weeks loads of winners at great odds forecast tri casts big payouts so I did buy a copy many moons ago enjoyed reading it and the follow up winners back winners the 3 month diary was most interesting my problem the points based system 5 PTS for a win LTO but that could have been a 3 horse race another horse wins LTO in a 18 runner race and gets the same 5 PTS I did like the idea of certain stakes to there odds

Yeah, he had a little place in Morcombe Bay where he set up as his book dispatch and tipping centre. The first book was best for the odd big price winner with some great CSF for good measure but if you wanted more winners then his master formula was the book for you. Really the only difference was he added points for the first 3 in the betting forecast and again more for being in the top 3 on form ratings. I had my own little take on it basically a starting short list if in the top 5 or 6 on his ratings depending on the type of race. Also best to forget some types of race and in a lot of cases also better to go against the fav as in the long run better profits to be had in the 7/2-7/1 range but in big H,caps up to 16/1 looked at. All the best to one and all.

It works at York a lot, not all the time but i went to the ebor meeting last summer and it looked hard on the thursday i was struggling to find bets on a social drinking day out, big handicap 2 c/d winners had 10 ew on the 2 on the tote the flying ginger 40/1 on the tote paid for the day lol, down to clive that one
see the flying gingers should be running there again soon maybe ebor although price will be shorter they seem to line it up for then

Celtic warrior - ...So many horses just do not want to win and the rare ones that do run up sequences...

So true. I remember Sir Mark Prescott many moons ago, suggesting horses tolerate a training regime and racing on the track for a period of time, but eventually sour of it. Backing horses who run up winning sequences has always been my most successful punting and the trick is spotting it earlier enough to get a decent price.

I read the Fineform by Clive Holt book in the early 80's. Quite enjoyed the read at the time but doubt it really helped other than make me think more systematically about betting.

That's right SA. What's really handy is being certain you are looking at a Listed horse when it's on 75-80. Not many of the pundits can do that.

Current Season’s two previous outings
1st
5 points

2nd
3 points

3rd
2 points

4th
1 point

Course and Distance success
Course and Distance
3 points

Distance
2 points

Course
1 point




Current Season’s two previous outings
1st
6 points

2nd
4 points

3rd
3 points

4th
2 point

5th + 1 point

Course and Distance success
Course and Distance
5 points

Distance
3 points

Course
2 points

Read that and his Winners Always Back Winners many moons ago.

Frankly, was surprised he was so successful given it all seemed, well, a bit basic, really.

To give a rather exaggerated example : horse runs a close up 3rd in the Derby LTO - gets 2 points. LTO winner of a seller, in contrast, gets 5 points. It's pretty obvious which of the two would win a match race next time out, all other things being equal.

Maybe he catered for that in the other book mentioned here ( Master Formula ? ) by considering ratings.

A very similar system is doing the rounds now : The Larkspur Method. That suffers from many of the defects I felt Fineform had, but then I suppose it does at least provide a reasonably systematic way of going about your form study if you're new to the game, from which you can then move away from as you gain more experience.

"that book and its follow-ups must have paid for those deer a good few times over"

Don't know it for fact, but I heard he was a Millionaire, didn't make his fortune from backing horses he made it from selling that book. Advertising it for years with full page adverts in the sporting press, very enticing adverts cleverly worded. Before he came up with that book/system he was advertising systems in the old Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book.

bluebook...you give a good example of where the FF formula should fall down. But it doesn't as often as might think it does. What the vast majority of us do is exactly what you are saying in your example - compare classes of race but unless they are as extreme as your example, I have never found that to work as well as I'd like.

Let's also remember that when Holt first came up with his method, it was quite advanced for the time. I think the main reason the method is still such a good starting point with a race is what has already been mentioned on this thread - lots and lots of horses just cannot, or will not, run to their ability. Hence, a horse with form figures of 121 and C/D has shown it is currently putting it all in.

As for the Master Formula he went on to produce in the second book, well that is now very dated because it relies upon awarding points for the betting forecast. Back then the betting forecasts in the sporting papers were good but now they are well off. It's on here where the betting is most accurate but that can swing about and so this part of the 'Master Formula' is not so relevant.

followed it in 1990 on the flat got some big winners knight of mercy 14-1 stewards cup eradicate 12-1 zetland cup didnt work that well on jumps and next seasons flat so switched to timeform 50 to follow

Puzzled as to why there are two scoring methods given by Greg_Gory.

Don't know it for fact, but I heard he was a Millionaire, didn't make his fortune from backing horses he made it from selling that book.

Clive was racing everyday in the north i remember him working on a system backing maidens i saw his book turned over 150k with the books he used to be racing around for the prices on the flat and the day at york where he backed with cash the 20/1 ebor winner and he gave it out he was happy that day.

nice kind man and very clever to come out with a formula that will stand the test of time i still use it not every day by any means, but to my own method especially where its handicaps or hard races and social race days.
know for a fact he was up at 6 everyday and kept meticulousness records to back up his claims, he worked hard

Like many I suspect I was intrigued by the SL ads. I feared being mugged off but eventually succumbed. I'd been punting doubles trebles and all sorts of other combinations for around 15 years at the time, and thought, "well I can only be conned once".
It's fair to say that that little book changed everything. Ok the formula was a hook, a bit of fluff, and took no account of the relative merit of performance. But the rest laid out the principles of successful betting. It was the first time I'd given any thought to price and relative chances as he worked out, albeit crudley, what was a fair price at which to bet. Just the very act of deciding not to back the likeliest winner based soley on price, opened my eyes wide and I never looked back. The way that he showed a steady accumulation of the bank, rather than the once a year windfall, offsetting some of the inevitable losses was, so seductive. Yes I've refined my approach over many years since, including with the help of other more sophisticated guides. But Clive Holt is the foundation of everything I do. I'm no pro, but the excitement I get from trying to act and think like one is the draw.
The book was called "Be a successful punter with Fineform as your guide". I did just that.

Surprised he did not factor in ground conditions or the jockey.

Must have had his reasons.

Just realised I was muddling him with Stewart Simpson's publication. Still, I do remember reading Holt's too.

Reading Nick Mordins Winning Without Thinking having taken it down after many years sitting on the shelf. Boy is it hard work , after 2 weeks still only on page 78 of 400 and odd...

I enjoyed Mordin's books.

Why are you finding it hard work ?

I thought Mordins other book was a decent intro to form study, How to bet for a living or similar, early 90s, just after Fineform.

FF Sake - You must be absolutely Joking !

Mordin - of All people - "a decent intro to [b]form [b]study" ...

'Never in a million'. ... absolutely Never.


There are some NAIVE 'Innocents Abroad' on this Thread ....  and Not Just the above Poster.

Blue book its in very small print for a start and is mostly about how he devised his systems in a blow by blow manner , there were many of them. I had glanced over it several years ago but finding it hard work now.

With full page adverts costing into 4 figures even back then... and personally knew an extremely tight and cynical guy/small punter. Was amazed he bought anything "tipping " wise. I thought then if he's bought it nearly everyone will have. So I would be amazed if he didn't make several thousands a week gross from the books.

No joke onlooker, was the the first book I'd read that got me wanting to delve further.
Which I'm guessing was the whole point of the book, not take to him as gospel, as from memory it was one win bet and forecast which made his totals.

Jun 24, 2022 -- 12:25PM, bluebook wrote:

Just realised I was muddling him with Stewart Simpson's publication. Still, I do remember reading Holt's too.

Two similarly named books Profitable winners always back value winners https://www.amazon.co.uk/Winners-Back-Clive-Holt/dp/0949017027
and Always Back Winners https://www.amazon.co.uk/Always-Back-Winners-How-Horses/dp/1874645043

I am Nit 'Joking' - either.

Mordin was just a 'Speed Figures' Merchant - with a ridiculously narrow range of figures - even for Group Race performances - of between around 33 - 48.

That was, partially, because he did NOT Adjust his Figures for Weight carried, or to be carried.

Met him a few times, years ago - Bit of a 'boffin type' mentality. (who never seemed to wash his pullovers - True )

But a FORM student - I repeat - FORM - Never in a million years

Just a Speed Figures devotee .... and Speed Figures simply cannot work out MOST of the time - let alone all the time.

Met him a few times, years ago - Bit of a 'boffin type' mentality. (who never seemed to wash his pullovers - True Happy )...

Value Betting by Mark Coton another good one was he the original Pricewise guy in the Racing Post

Mordin's writing never ceased to fascinate me, but I don't think I backed a single winner on the back of anything he wrote. Winning without thinking was the biggest misnomer ever.

@ Bluebook

other one was Fineform Adjusted posted on here a while back.

Utter nonsense to say that Mordin was just a speed figure merchant.
He was into horse profiling in a big way : similar to the work Andrew Mount does

When I began this thread I said that Fineform was as good as anything else as a STARTING point for studying a race. And that's because it is quite simple whereas all the Mordin stuff is pretty complex.

Indeed, I believe that Mordin, plus many TV pundits, are guilty of over complicating their analysis.

There is a point in all form study, horse profiling, speed-figure analysis and the rest, where it becomes just too involved and then no decision can be reached. I think that's what did for Mordin eventually, he burned himself out with just too much analysis and could not see the wood for the trees. Something Clive Holt never did!

dukeofpuke24 Jun 22 19:27Joined: 04 May 03 | Topic/replies: 17,105 | Blogger: dukeofpuke's blog

Value Betting by Mark Coton another good one was he the original Pricewise guy in the Racing Post

duke, Mark Coton, yep! Originator of Pricewise back in the day and the Value Betting book (about 1990) was a wonderful

starter for making your own tissue and looking for value. Great fun! And still very valid, imo!

Although most racing pundits will try and justify their selections with hard form facts. Looking at form is more of an art form than a black and white logical mathematical solution.there’s too many variables to use a simplistic calculation to find the answer to the winner of most races.

The hard bit is developing this art whilst still applying basic logic.

50% of times horse A beats horse B. Then 50% of the time horse B will beat horse A next time. Because of different variables. Learning these variables takes years and ends up becoming an art rather than a skill.

But the simplistic bit of racing is. Various systems work in finding winners. From

Race card numbers
Names
Class
Horses for courses
Jockeys
Trainers
Owners
Goings
Distance
Improvers
Well hcped

You name it. There’s a reason why a horse might win. Knowing which reason it will be today. Is the art.

you can add 'because its geared up to the nines' to that list

Thanks for that explanation Greg_Gory.

Actually, steerforth, I do remember Mordin putting me on to at least one winner : FALBRAV. Backed him in the Eclipse stakes at Sandown in 2003 at 8/1. Oh, happy days !

Mordin wrote a book on speed, but Betting For A Living was all about form. Specifically, it was about the profiling of form to match the conditions on the day. It was the discarding of any "below" form performances that didn't meet the conditions presented that added that layer of compexity that was fatal in my view. It became a mantra (at least within that book), and started to resemble a confirmation bias. He picked a few winners out, but his methods  led to plenty of losers and missed winners when I tried to put it to work.
I wouldn't call form study an Art - wrong term I think, but it's definitely "a feel". And that sense comes and goes. I can be right in the zone for a week or so, then it deserts me for a while, then comes back. And part of being in and out of the zone, is that you know which it is at the time. When you feel right press up.

Can't believe this one hasn't been mentioned yet.

A timeless classic written by John White, that I got hold of back in the early 90s....

[   This image is no longer available.   ]

The rest, as they say, is history.

I had that one too for a while.

Seem to remember going through the races in bed in the morning using the Daily Mirror,all while eating toast and drinking lots of tea. By the time the paper got to my dad, it'd be covered in grease spots... .

And that's interesting what you say, steerforth, about the 'feel' coming and going. I'm very much the same. Sometimes it all seems so easy, and at other times impossibly difficult. But then I also think that in my case it also depends on my moods : whether I'm up, down or -rarely- on an even keel. Think it's fatal to be either up or down when betting as it seriously impairs your decision making.

Currently finding it bloody hard !

Or do as I did yesterday look at them in the paddock , two stand outs yesterday were Wexford Native missed the 4/1 on offer took 10/30 Fav was really on his toes for about 15 mins in the paddock,  Westover looked really strong and Tuesday on the other hand looked as if she had had a hard enough few weeks. If it was only always that easy...

Remember only too well 'Racing:Systems with the Pocket Calculator'. Spent hours trying to come to terms with it but had to admit failure. If memory serves found it far too complex. Still have Clive Holt's books,though along with the masterpiece 'Winning Ways To Bet' by Methodmaker containing the VDW Approach to winner-finding. Happy days!!!!

Never heard of that one by Methodmaker. Strange really, since I see it was a Raceform publication, and I thought I knew most of their publications.

I,ve read betting for a living , fineform etc . Clive studies in the grounds of his mansion , he was a engineer ? Proven , Promising , profit . Nick was about kempton mostly nh , form , but , mostly wellbeing in the parade ring . Great reads , lost them over time , but , still remember .

Proven , Progressive and profit

Holt and Mordin were probably the most significant writers of the past fifty years, in that each inspired a new generation of professionals. Even if they were wrong in every detail, their core message was that racing is a game that can be analysed and conquered; it is rational and not merely equine roulette or entirely corrupt.

Always back winners by stewart simpson
Every andrew beyer book
Every mordin book, espec mordin on speed

For the novice:

Braddocks complete guide a masterful book

A fair point, Ramruma, but speaking personally those books and endless adverts had the opposite effect. They suggested that propunting was not a real thing: just a fantasy to hook the gullible.

The inspiration for me - the thing which kept me believing - was Dodger McCartney. And specifically the pair of articles Brough Scott wrote about him in the Sunday Times. Going punting with Dodger at Ascot one day, bumping into Dodger at Folkestone another. I desperately wanted to be Dodger, and without Brough Scott's introduction to the man in those newspaper columns, I don't think I would have persevered with the sport all through my teens and twenties. Right up until the glorious day when Nigel Lawson abolished the on-course tax, and made propunting a genuine possibility for anybody.

In terms of analysing a race and then producing a bet from it , I've shied away from a analytical approach . We can all say whom should win , most often than not though , their is a horse whom,s price doesn't reflect its profile and is of interest  . I  tend to bet these . That has been successful . As ever though that has changed and  I think that theirs a snowball effect from that angle being successful. bookies can step in and start a snowball with a horse thats not fancied , but , make it look like it is . So you cant get steamers that were never expected , bet like certs ! cos the bookies painted him up as a steamer and everyone looking for the steamer rode in .  For me im gonna look at the form again as i think the market just looks at the money movement

Does anyone know what Clive died from?

I'm on holiday for a couple of weeks, dusted down my copy of

Be a Successful Punter by Clive Holt.

I haven't read it in 30+ years, a few pages missing but almost fully intact, will pass a bit of time in the sun.

Also same author Profitable Betting Strategies pale green cover 1989

a breakdown without giving much away

winners in your newspapers

winners from form

winners on time

winners from the wing

The back paqe has a great 'taking a chance' that all bookmakers know but dont want their customers to know

and even if a thousand mug punters read the back page would say bullsh!t

Does anyone know what Clive died from?
the dreaded cancer, he had a young daughter as well

Thanks for that know all, very sad,I liked Clive.

Dukeofpuke

Any idea where I could see that page, or even get the book.

The deceptively simple Fineform Ratings are still churning out the winners. I limit bets to horses that came 1st or 2nd last time out and are clear on the ratings. Sandret @ 10/3 and Masterdream @ 16/5 are two I backed today. I avoid maximum rated horses in handicaps though. Especially in handicaps over the jumps. More often than not they get beaten at short odds. They're actually a good source of bets for punters who like to lay horses to lose.