2013 Wishlist?

More punters realising the game is not bent and actually studying the form book.

Interesting Ginger, do you think every horse is trying every day it runs?

My opinion has always been that in the better races (Graded company) there’s obviously far more chance of everything running on its merits than a 20 runner maiden hurdle, where handbrakes are often never let down.

Totally agree with you THM, the better the quality of racing the more likely they are to be running "on their merits. Which is why we both stick to the better races.

Woolfie is right… it would be nice if every horse in every race is "trying". Didn’t mean it to sound like i was getting at him.

I am just saying it would be equally as nice if more punters realised the game is far straighter than some believe it to be… If punters would only improve their own knowledge, buy a good form book, study hard and (dare I say it) have some knowledge of value/percentages – they just might make a profit from betting. But it’s easier just to say "the game’s bent".

I studied form for nearly forty years and kept my head above water until relatively recently. There are simply too many non triers these days. Connections can be rewarded for not winning which offsets outlay in preparing a horse for a day when a win is the target at attractive odds. Gingerhedger, sagely promotes the study of form while spraying money on several runners in a race and backing them Each Way, those are not the tactics of form readers who are more likely to reduce possibilities to no more than two. Taking a scattergun to a race is not the study of form, Ginger is as blind as the rest of us.

I’d argue they’re not and his suppressive jibe at the masses for not being able to read form was more a reflection of his superiority complex than a generalised piece of advice for everyone.

The poster does have valid points,GT may do his form but he still punts looking at the fractions. One tip one race each week for the year on your races over there i would take him on if he has the courage to make it a worthwhile bet He is always telling us he is pretty good,maybe Cormack could hold the wad of cash until years end to give to the winner?

Gingerhedger, sagely promotes the study of form while spraying money on several runners in a race and backing them Each Way, those are not the tactics of form readers who are more likely to reduce possibilities to no more than two. Taking a scattergun to a race is not the study of form, Ginger is as blind as the rest of us.

If that’s how you look ar GTs methods then I don’t think you have the remotest understanding of how he works.

Rob

I fully understand his methods, they don’t work for me.

The winner is the only ”value” selection.

On a different subject, if there’s one point I agree with then it’s Triptych’s point about getting to the races and watching horses. I think it would benefit many to spend an afternoon just watching horses in the whole racing process, from pre-parade to unsaddling. I seldom come away from a meeting without having learnt something by observing the runners and their physique and behaviour.

Rob

Totally agree Rob – I very rarely have a bet now unless I have seen the horses in the parade ring first.

I studied form for nearly forty years

and kept my head above water until relatively recently.

There are simply too many non triers these days.

Connections can be rewarded for not winning which offsets outlay in preparing a horse for a day when a win is the target at attractive odds.

Gingerhedger, sagely promotes the study of form while spraying money on several runners in a race and backing them Each Way,

those are not the tactics of form readers who are more likely to reduce possibilities to no more than two. Taking a scattergun to a race is not the study of form, Ginger is as blind as the rest of us.

If in the punters opinion more than one horse is value in a race – then there’s nothing wrong in backing them all. Of course if the punter is ("blind") no good at identifying value he/she will LOSE even more with a "scattergun" approach. More selections, more money invested, more money lost.

Instead of backing all the value selections in a race – some punters will prefer to back ONLY the ONE very best VALUE selection. Nothing wrong with this way either. I just prefer having more winners because it keeps confidence up, which is vital for a correct thought process in analysing a race/value.

If you have any other comments/questions Woolfie, please start another thread and I’ll be happy to answer them. I have no wish to make GA’s "Wishlist" in to a "Value" thread.

I’d argue they’re not and his suppressive jibe at the masses for not being able to read form was more a reflection of his superiority complex than a generalised piece of advice for everyone.

Careful MH, I just might have to reveal your true identity.

As Harry Enfield might say MH,
"I am considerably bettter than yyyyyyouuu"…

Or is it just your jealousy.
As far as my motives are concerned, you’ll see what you want to see.

More punters realising the game is not bent and actually studying the form book.

Interesting Ginger, do you think every horse is trying every day it runs?

My opinion has always been that in the better races (Graded company) there’s obviously far more chance of everything running on its merits than a 20 runner maiden hurdle, where handbrakes are often never let down.

Totally agree with you THM, the better the quality of racing the more likely they are to be running "on their merits. Which is why we both stick to the better races.

Woolfie is right… it would be nice if every horse in every race is "trying". Didn’t mean it to sound like i was getting at him.

I am just saying it would be equally as nice if more punters realised the game is far straighter than some believe it to be…

If punters would only improve their own knowledge, buy a good form book, study hard and (dare I say it) have some knowledge of value/percentages – they just might make a profit from betting. But it’s easier just to say "the game’s bent".

True, some of the stuff I’ve seen written on the Betfair forum even the writers of Lost couldn’t come up with.

I studied form for nearly forty years

and kept my head above water until relatively recently.

There are simply too many non triers these days.

Connections can be rewarded for not winning which offsets outlay in preparing a horse for a day when a win is the target at attractive odds.

Gingerhedger, sagely promotes the study of form while spraying money on several runners in a race and backing them Each Way,

those are not the tactics of form readers who are more likely to reduce possibilities to no more than two. Taking a scattergun to a race is not the study of form, Ginger is as blind as the rest of us.

If in the punters opinion more than one horse is value in a race – then there’s nothing wrong in backing them all. Of course if the punter is ("blind") no good at identifying value he/she will LOSE even more with a "scattergun" approach. More selections, more money invested, more money lost.

Instead of backing all the value selections in a race – some punters will prefer to back ONLY the ONE very best VALUE selection. Nothing wrong with this way either. I just prefer having more winners because it keeps confidence up, which is vital for a correct thought process in analysing a race/value.

If you have any other comments/questions Woolfie, please start another thread and I’ll be happy to answer them. I have no wish to make GA’s "Wishlist" in to a "Value" thread.

I’ve only one thing to add and that is this – It’s only value if it wins.

In other words by backing more than one in a race you accept that you have placed bets on runners that you know will lose. There is nothing more demoralising than backing 2 or 3 horses in a race and seeing them all beaten.There will be horses opposing your selections that have shown very little in public but are good enough to trounce your selections, it happens every day of the week at every racecourse in the country. And your formbooks will not have offered a hint of the winners ability.

All kinds of people have their own methods and that’s fine but your sanctimonious put down of everyone who expresses even the mildest scepticism is incredibly irritating.