An old boy I know swears this one makes money.

[Seagull]

22 feb

ANY FAV
Yakimov won the first race of the day @2/5

profit £2.00

bank £655.74

ANY FAV NON HAND
Yakimov won @2/5

profit £4.00

Bank £364.32

[Seagull]

Sat 22 Feb

ANY FAV
A slow start today and it took six races to get the first fav home but Flying Falcon winning at 11/4 made a profit of £565.00

So from a bank of nothing its in a lsp of £1,220.74.

ANY FAV NON HAND TO 9 RUNNERS
A slow start with this method also but Jack Sullivan won the 6th race but at the sp of evens it made just £10 profit

Bank to c/f £374.32

[arkle55]

SEAGULL HI
I am a little bit lost again, you said that it took six races to find a winner.First bet £5 2nd10 3rd20 4th40 5th80 6th160. Can you confirm please

[arkle55]

SEAGULL HI
160 AT 11/4= 600
STAKES ADDED TOGETHER 315

600 – 315 = 285

WHERE HAVE I GONE WRONG

[Seagull]

Sorry Arkle
I missed out the Irish racing and as the old boy includes them and I have been including them since starting this on 1st Jan.

From the gg.com website it took 9 races before the first fav won today.
that horse was beau micheal 2.45 Fairyhouse
so
5, 10, 20,40, 80, 160,320, 640, 1280
so he would had had £1,280 on Beau Michael at 6/4
that would have won £1,920 plus stake
less £1,275 which is total lost on first 8 bets.
so profit should be £645.00

bank was £655.74
add today£645.00
bank c/f £1,300.74

I think that is now correct.

Im only personally backing the non hand ones.

[Artemis]

The system looked over the edge of the cliff yesterday. If that horse had lost, the next bet was the tank!

It has gone on longer than predicted, but the average price of the favourite has been lower than the 7/4 average(failure every 21days) I suggested.

If the average price was evens, failure can be expected 0.4% of attempts at the losing sequence of 8 required to break the bank of £5000 starting from a £10 stake on the first bet and then doubling up. In other words, failure in an average time of 250 days.if the average price was 6/4, the probabilty of failure is 1.7%( an average time of 59 days)

If you start with £5 rather than £10, it extends the sequence to 9 required for the bank to go broke. At average odds evens this averages at 1 in 500days or 1 in 100days at 6/4.

Edit:

I have to correct myself, on reflection.

It actually takes 10 bets to scupper the £5000 bank, so my predictions are pessimistic.
A losing sequence of 10 at average odds of evens has a probability of 0.1% (2years 8months) and at 6/4 average odds it’s 0.6%(166 days). It may go on for a while……. [/color:3rjdqnnz]

[arkle55]

ARTEMIS
Is’nt the simplistic answer , that Seagull’s method could go on and on untill he meets any long losing run which end’s with a winner that is odds on (which would create a dent in the bank), and the pattern repeats itself .However as Seagull’s method got of to a flyer is that likely to happen in the near future,

[arkle55]

SEAGULL HI
You said that your freind uses high street bookmakers , is it easy to get £1280 on a horse in your area. I have seen it happen before, but i have also known the bookmaker to take half the money at the price required and the other half at a shorter price

[Seagull]

Arkle
Yes its easy to lump on in the 2 shops Hills and Ladbrokes he uses that are grade 1 shops.
He does try to get the best price but most I think are at s.p. so no real danger of not getting on.
Jock Mc Crakken and his mates have no problems
Next door to Ladbrokes there is a Nationwide cash point and across the street a Abbey and a Lloyds cashpoint I know he just gets cash over the counter weekdays. So he seems to have thought it all out.

The one that I know that knocks him back is Betfreds in the same street.

Dont forget he is betting favs. Ladbrokes and Hills both cover themselves by phoning in but he always gets on.

Yesterday if he had lost on the 9th race the 10th race had a winning fav so did the 11th. If he had gone to the 10th race the profit would have been £952 20.

Since I have been personally doing it with non handicaps the problem has been hitting an odds on fav but its not doing that bad.

[Seagull]

Artemis,

There is no way anyone can calculate what day it may all hit the buffers.
It may happen twice in 2 days. It may be this week, next month or next year.
I agree that it will happen but when? No one knows!

[Artemis]

Seagull,

As with all probabilities, you can never be certain. The figures I quote are just average expectations which will only be accurate in the long run.

As you rightly say, nobody knows when it will happen. If you know the average price, you can predict the average length of time before a system fails. You can also set up your system so that the probabilty of failure is tiny, but if you play long enough it will eventually fail.

[arkle55]

SEAGULL HI
Would it not be better to wait until the first 2/3 fav get beat and then continue the beting sequence. It seem’s to me that the big profit comes when there is a winner after a long losing sequence of course as long as it’s not odds on.

[Artemis]

arkle 55,

And that is also where the danger of the big loss comes. Anyway, races are independent events and the losing sequences are merely accidents of random chance, so waiting until there have been 2 or 3 losers(or indeed 7 or has absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the next event. It is a trick that often sucks people into having a bet. See earlier posts on this thread.

[arkle55]

ARTEMIS HI
If you are backing at short s/p that is part of the risk

[Seagull]

I made the effort to trot off to my local Ladbrokes today and lol and behold he was there ready to fire away at them.

He is holding a ticket with 1280 on Beau Micheal at 13/8 and he cannot get paid until lunchtime Monday.

I asked him about the chances of not getting on and he has never been knocked back as he does not mind having the S.P. price.
So no chance of having some part of the bet at one price and the rest at S.P.
He did say when they telephone the head office once they say he is in most days he is on!

What was concerning me was he first said his bank was £2,500 he said that is the case but when the need arises he uses his winnings as well.

Last year he said he lost his bank and winnings three times and starts again but ended up winning a shade over £2,500 overall.
The year before he said he won the same amount but again lost his bank and winnings 4 times.

So in a way he has a built in loss limit which is £2,500 and whatever the bank is.

Last year he said that in July he had won over £9,000 00 in total

He said one day last year he was over a thousand down but then he got a 5/1 winning favourite with £1280 on won over £7,600 but that is including the stake.

He does seem genuine and honest and most of the regulars there know what he does.

Sunday 24 Feb

ANY FAV
Thoughtsof stardom won first race of the day @7/2

profit on day £17.50

Bank to c/f £1318.24 (mark said he was £1,400 up with yesterdays winnings so he must be beating the s.p. a bit)

ANY FAV NON HAND TO 9 RUNNERS
Calient won the first at Fontwell evens
profit on day £10.00
backed this in Ladbrokes missed the 11/10

Bank to c/f £384.34

[Seagull]

Artemis,
Not having a moan in any way but in the very first reply (page 1) you stated that it would be ‘lucky to survive 3 weeks’ but now you give it 2 years and 8 months. Can you explain the change of mind?

You also stated that there have been several occasions where if the method had been started on a different date that the whole bank would have gone bust. That is not the case.

I am not in any way thinking that there is no possiblity of not losing the bank and winnings but from what he explained today does show he has thought it out and there is no way he just goes on regardless until he gets a winner.

The idea that every race is a seperate event from any other is certainly true but I think his thinking behind this is overall that the number of times (percentages) a favourite wins is very consistent and that is what Mark has based it on.

Anyway it has generated interest and exposed many misconceptions regarding doubling up methods.

[Sean Rua]

Yes, Seagull,

I think this doing far better than most published betting theorists would imagine.

A very interesting thread.

Btw, do you ever bet in Baker Street?

[Author]

Posts