November 3, 2002 at 13:40 #4242
Hi Everybody<br> I`m a new member to this site,I`ve been collecting systems for a number of years,mainly from the old Poundstretcher relay company run by Peter Morris a few years ago.I bought hundreds and never really took the time to check any of them for a long period of time.I would like to ask you all a question .Does a continous winning system really exist or are we just looking for the holy grail and really kidding ourselves the whole tjme?If I was in possesson of a system which could win 50 points a year every year I would never have to work again,this would seem like absolute heaven to me,with communications what they are these days I would put all of my bets on from my mobile whilst laying on the beach somewhere in the Carribean.Does such a system exist and what price could be put on it?How long would it be before everybody had latched on to it and the bookies put a stop to it?I find your posts to this site imformative and very enjoyable please keep up the good work .Kind Regards VicNovember 3, 2002 at 14:16 #101557
Thanks Ian<br> So does this mean that all of the systems that exist are basically flawed because in the long run they will eventually lose?If this is the case why do we bother with systems at all and why are they continually marketed often for large sums of money,are they not proofed to the papers beforehand.Is there anybody out there that actually makes thier living from backing a racing system exclusively for a livng?<br> VicNovember 3, 2002 at 14:25 #101558bowserMember
- Total Posts 7
Hi Vic,and welcome.In reply to your last question the answer is i feel no.As Ian has said the only way to show a profit is lots of "hard graft",although some systems may show short term profit i think they lose money in the long run. imo.November 3, 2002 at 16:08 #101560MatronParticipant
- Total Posts 6236
Sureley, if you are choosing horses to bet on you are using some form of system made up of your own parameters. Even if you are working from the "form book" you are coming to a conscious decision of where your money is going to go through a process of elimination – if a horse acts on "soft going" etc., etc.
I basically think all gamblers have a "systematic" approach to their activities by using a series of "filters" to make their final decision of whether to place their bet or not. I think "systems" tend to have a more set of rigid rules but, these can be quite often be adapted and manipulated to one’s advantage.
Regards – Matron<br>:cool:November 3, 2002 at 16:59 #101561
Spot on Matron!<br>Hi Vic, despite everyone else, not just on here but everywhere not supporting the systems approach I am a fan of systems. Systems do work but the main part of all systems is awareness and the system’s historical data, which is the part you can’t buy.November 3, 2002 at 19:06 #101562
Thanks Guys<br> This has certainly opened my eyes to a few things,the trouble is I don`t know whether to laugh or cry,the answers you give are probably what I thought deep down inside but not what I wanted to hear.I was hoping you would tell me your all making pots of money in five minutes a day with some wonderful one-a-day method.Here I sit with about 300 hundred systems I have bought from Poundstretcher over the years and probably not one of them is worth the paper they are written on,still it is almost November5th so if your in the Bromley area of Kent and you see a huge bonfire you will know what it is.Thanks for the help though it has been very enlightening.<br> Kind Regards VicNovember 3, 2002 at 22:52 #101563SeagullMember
- Total Posts 1708
Vic & Ian,<br>Ian I liked your letter in The Racing Post by the way last week. <br>This may seem so stupid or so obvious but I can assure you it works and I have 16 seasons of results to prove it. If you find a trainer that has made an overall profit for each of the last 3 seaons in the same type of race at the same track the chances are overall they will keep on doing this. Nothing new as any any business such as Tesco will build a new store based on past results i.e they know that past results that have made them overall profits how many car park spaces check outs etc etc to have. I have posted here many times if you have had just Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£100 on every horse trained by Said Bin Surror over the last six seaons you would have been over Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£16,000 in overall profit at s.p. prices and again this season an overall profit at s.p. prices to level stakes. For the Nat Hunt look at Paul Nicholls. Problem is when a system might be having a bad run people jump ship. Take Ms Linda Perratt she will have many losers at Ayr every season but the last 4 seasons an overall profit (just win only at s.p) there are hundreds of examples I could give .November 4, 2002 at 10:47 #101564SeagullMember
- Total Posts 1708
I also do P. MAKIN in non 2 year old handicaps on the all weather at Wolverhampton Pixo or daylight can confirm this and another 20/1 winner there last sat night same trainer in 3 year old handicap.November 4, 2002 at 11:42 #101565
It seems that the majority of punters agree, often through painful experience, that systems will lose in the long run. Therefore, the opposite should apply, that is, if you take a variety of ‘mug systems’ operate them to lay on the exchanges you should make money. What do you think?November 4, 2002 at 12:51 #101566
Ian, <br> It’s not a matter of mugs on the exchanges. The premise is that if systems lose money backing, they must win money laying. I’m aware that this is a simplification and that prices, commission etc. come into any factoring; but surely those same factors apply when backing?November 4, 2002 at 12:58 #101567
Seagull has made a good point there about historical data. IMO you can’t know if a system works until you have gathered at least a full season’s results (preferably three seasons). That’s where Impact Values and big number mathematics help to determine the validity of the data. The trick to finding a workable system is finding one that suits your own personality, that you can work with. Some people hate losing, so look for shorter priced selections. Others care not a jot win or lose and carry on through losing streaks of 20 or upwards.<br>Without the proper analysis you can’t have the confidence to carry on betting because you don’t know what to expect over a long period of time. That’s why systems don’t work…….you’ve got to do your home work!November 4, 2002 at 15:09 #101568
Ian<br> I think you are correct when you say there is more to laying than the bare stats. However, how would you feel as an ex-bookie, for instance, laying this crazy system: <br>take the first three runners in separate races who’s name begins with an s, as long as they are under 4.1 in the betting, back them in three doubles and a treble.November 4, 2002 at 16:03 #101569
Ian,<br> Why not? It’s only a matter of calculation from one race to the next. A layer doesn’t need a multiple bet facility on the Exchange to take on such bets. I suspect, however, that we are digressing from the theme of this thread; and that the ever optimistic punter will always search for the perfect system. Good luck to them.November 4, 2002 at 20:49 #101570
So Ian, if a punter does have a system and it breaks even and he forces into profit using an aggressive staking plan, say he’s coming from a bank of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£10 – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£15K to win Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£150 a day and he consistently wins say five days out of six.<br>How long would it take, from a bookies point of view before you closed his account?November 4, 2002 at 21:38 #101571
Just as a bit of fun i’ve checked out ‘crazy’ system from the laying point of view. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Twenty eight days of racing taken at random – nineteen days produced three qualifiers of which seventeen lost the four bets involved. The two losing days meant a payout on two doubles – Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£25 to Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£ stakes. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Therefore Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£68 won less Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£25 =Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£43 profit. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Crazy eh?<br> Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Scipio
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.