- This topic has 166 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Interesting results JAR. Can you name the computer program used?
Did you notice any differences on the types of races rated?
Any P/L details?<br>
I could name the computer program used but as it is a commercial product I will not do so because of libel laws.
If fact the computer program did so poorly that I dropped it from my analysis.<br>At present I am running 4 remaining comparisons. I pick a race at random from all types of race with less than 14 runners where all the horses have at least 3 race placings.<br>I then check each race and note the following for it.<br>The Adrian Massey Top rated.<br>The Fineform Top rated.<br>My Own System Top rated<br>A specific newspaper tipster choice.
Results so far from 170 £10 bets:
Adrian Massey £366 loss<br>Fineform £412 loss<br>My System £22 loss<br>Newspaper tipster £594 loss.
It is early days yet and the positions of each selection method may change.<br>What I have seen so far indicates the poor predictive ability of commercial computer programs. This surprised me to say the least. I shall continue my analysis to see if tipsters or fineform perform any better than my own system, the rules of which are writtten on two sides of A4 paper.
The results don’t surprise me, JAR, but they are a bit on the low side as far as profitability is concerned. I have analysed tipsters performances over the years and they haven’t changed all that much despite all the advantages that tipsters and handicappers have today over those, say, twenty years ago.
The long term average for tipsters is a loss of between 5 and 10 per cent against a loss for the average punter of between 10 and 25 per cent. Anyone doing better than this is really doing quite well considering the relentless effect of the margin you are trying to beat.
If anyone is making a long term profit of 5 per cent or better, they have a very good method and they are quite possibly doing it for a living. Or else, they are very very lucky, and proper punters don’t believe in luck.
Hi Artemis,<br>Profits are a bit on the low side, this may be because I am virtually picking races with a pin to bet on – a kind of no brainer method.  <br>However looking at my results I can easily move my method into a small profit just be selecting certain types of races and only betting when one or two other confirming factors occur.  I have not done this because the purpose of the exercise for me, is to compare each system and not to influence outcome by any of my own ideas except for the rules laid down in a system I have invented.  I find this quite hard to do as I must refrain from any alteration of my system if it hits a bad patch. Also I must try not to pick any type of race that favours any one of the systems above the others. This is getting harder as it is becoming clear that each method does favour a certain kind of race. In fact all methods could be improved profit wise,  simply by selecting certain types of race they perform best in.  But this would be backfitting the data.<br>The only race selection criteria I have used is that which allows the rules of fineform and my system to be applied by insisting on a minimum number of place results for a horse. I also never bet on very large races as these are a bookmakers benefit and I have to select races where AM and the newspaper tipster give a selection. As you said newspaper tipsters and what not,  do achieve a certain level of profit (usually a small loss) year in year out. So I am expecting the results of all the systems to converge to about the same level of profit or small loss after a longer betting period.  Of course I hope my system performs the best but it may not in the long run.:) At present it is achieving a result that is better than the other systems by a factor of ten. This must be a freak result to some extent, however it may indicate that in the long run my system is slightly better than the others.
In the short time I have been interested in horse racing I do think that races have become more competitive. Either that, or I had beginners luck at first and then as I learn’t more my methods became too similar to those of everybody else and so value was lost. If races have become a little more competitive it may explain why tipsters have been unable to apparently improve.<br>I feel there are more races today that look straighforwards at first but when you delve into the form deeper there is a hidden danger horse that always does not show in the simplistic racecards given in daily newspapers.<br>The change in the flat racing class system may make races even more competitive with overlap of class bands.
(Edited by JAR at 10:06 am on April 6, 2005)
Actually, JAR, your system is doing quite well even though it is showing a small loss, almost breaking even.
I think you are right in saying that the sample you gave is quite small: too small to draw any conclusions about the relative merits of each method.
I’m not sure that racing is any more competitive than it used to be, but it’s certainly a lot straighter than it was when I first became involved. There is also much more information available which should have made punting easier, but the layers are always a few steps ahead of the vast majority of punters. They employ their own experts who have access to all the information we have, plus a lot more. They also know when the right money is down which is a big advantage.
I don’t think any simplistic systems based on information in ordinary newspapers are any use, although plenty of people will tell you they are. The Fineform formula is ok for quickness and will provide a steady stream of fair priced winners, but it’s almost certain to produce a loss in the long term.
I think Adrian Massey is very good and has a logical approach to pure form analysis, but his methods can be improved upon. Over quite a long period his selections do better than most tipsters. He has shown that selecting the right races to bet in can make all the difference if you are relying purely on form.
Best of luck with your quest to find ‘your’ system that you are happy with. It might take you quite a time, but it’ll be worth it in the end.
Thanks Artemis.<br>Funny thing about Fineform, they used to have a web page, but now I cannot find it anywhere!
Update of results – now after 199 £10 level stake wagers.
A.Massey = £430  loss<br>Fineform  = £459  loss<br>My System = £62 loss<br>National Newspaper Tipster = £654 loss.<br>:)
(Edited by JAR at 5:29 pm on April 11, 2005)
Results update @ 220 £10 level stake wagers.
A.Massey £532 loss<br>Fineform £313 loss<br>My System £167 loss<br>Newspaper tipster £760 loss
<br>System results are beginning to converge.
update at 267 £10 bets
A.Massey £410 loss<br>Fineform £380 loss<br>My System £331 loss<br>Newspaper tipster £ 755 loss
and the newspaper tipster has a tipster service for which he charges! :)
I think people would be better off looking at the selections in Johnny B’s naps competition
I agree LookingForaWinner.
Although the Fineform method is simple I thought it would do better. After all Clive Holt used to sell a book based around that selection method. So I thought it might at least break even.<br>And I just cannot believe how bad the newspaper tipster is doing.  A national newspaper tipster at that.
update at 283 wagers<br>A.Massey       £470 loss<br>Fineform        £419 loss<br>My System      £398 loss<br>Newspaper tips  £845 loss
<br>A Massey selections may soon jump ahead because he seems to pick more long shots and so far a lot of these have just missed. I expect that soon some of his long shots will win and put him in front. The trouble is he also has long losing runs.
(Edited by JAR at 8:28 pm on April 28, 2005)
Update at 323 wagers
A. Massey £621 loss<br>Fineform £679 loss<br>My System £399 loss<br>Newspaper Expert tips £ 1026 loss
I can’t understand why all these perform so poorly. All are on record, except My System, of claiming a profit.<br>The only selection criteria applied to races is that I do not choose any where A. Massey does not give ratings. Otherwise race choice is random. Yet none of these selection methods are anywhere near being in profit. :(
JAR, this is reality, tipping is not easy and with the information that many of the professionals have available gives them an edge and forces the market down.
I find the tipping in the newspapers pretty appalling given how close they should be to the action. They have to pick a selection in every race which is obviously time consuming and difficult. But even the naps are poor performers.
Jar<br>i wonder how they would perform if you chose the top rating of the day for both fineform and massey , would they do any better<br>
(Edited by lineform at 5:53 pm on May 11, 2005)
Hi Lineform and LookingForAWinner.<br>I’m not sure exactly how Fineform and A.Massey would do if their top rated only are picked.  However looking at my figures so far I think all systems including mine would perform better if only the top rated were picked.<br>When I have time, after I have finished this analysis, I may look at only the top rated horses to see how they perform.<br>I am quite pleased with my system so far because I feel that if I start to get selective in the type of races that I pick, it may make a profit.  I am not selective at the moment as I wish to compare different methods. Picking one type of race may improve the results of one method and downgrade the results of another.  I wish to avoid this bias at present. My aim is to compare my system with others to see if it is of any use.  At the end of the day if over a lengthy series of bets my system outperforms a national newspaper tipster, fineform, and A.Massey ratings it must have some value.  Because I invented it,  I know that there is no one picking the same horses, so it will not lose value and hopefully will work over the long term. I may also with further study be able to improve it.
Newspaper tipsters do perform poorly. I would like to see a newspaper use its tipsters to make really good selections by concentrating on say 5 races a day only.<br>After all what punters want are tips or information that generates a profit.  Trouble is if they did this everyone would use the tips, odds would shorten and value would be lost.
Some people, claim to be able to make a living from betting on horses. If this claim is true why is it that a newspaper cannot put forwards an expert who can make a profit. According to a fineform booklet just 2 out of 35 newspaper napsters made a small profit at SP.
Is there a con going on here? Is it the bookmakers putting out claims in disguise, that you the punter can making a living from betting , to generate more custom? I feel a conspiracy theory coming on.
How many systems in the Public Domain are put out by genuine punters compared to those put out by Bookmakers to muddy the punting waters? How easy is it for the relative or friend of a trainer to bet on a horse to lose if he has a whisper that the horse is not fully fit.
My view is that now because of the betting exchanges allowing people to back horses to lose. We should at least have the published actual weights of a horse the day before a race. So at least the punter can tell if a horse is likely to be fit and at its "fighting weight". They do it with Boxers why not with horses.
I don’t know if anyone noticed, but a National Newspaper, missed out one days race meeting altogether and to compound the error printed the same race meeting in the paper twice on the same day! Hereford on Tuesday May 10th.  If that gets past them, how closely are they looking at races, I wonder. <br>
<br>
(Edited by JAR at 9:40 pm on May 11, 2005)
Newspaper tipsters are well over-rated John and so is Massey, in my opinion .. I think you’re prooving that very well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.