- This topic has 66 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
Another godawful thread that’s made it beyond thirty posts already. Not that it’s my problem but it does genuinely befuddle me as to why people fuel this utterly tedious garbage almost every time.
How do you know that I’ve not made it pay? I’ve withdrawn
profit from one of my accounts this very day.Prof (or whatever you’re calling yourself in this post). Screencap your account summary showing this imaginary profit (using paint to black out your personal details) and I will donate £10 to the IJF when I return to England this weekend.
Essentially, Gingerhedger and his acolytes are anoraks with ideas about mathematics that have no foundation in reality.
In my experience the world’s leading horseplayers are not moonlighting from their academic careers as math lecturers.My advice to them is buy a racehorse, rub shoulders with the cognoscenti, find out where their money is going and follow suit.
Why would a proven profitable punter want to take advice from you, someone who hasn’t proven anything ? Now read my last post and answer it.
Have you seen the profits churned by Ginge on his thread Woolf? It may not be by backing one horse per race, and as he’s stated on several occasions his methods may not be seen as ‘conventional’, but it certainly doesn’t deserve its’ knockers.
I noted his main bets over Friday and Saturday, he was down 62 points on his strongest selections. I hope he was backing 10p a point.
Which clearly shows you don’t understand betting or the words ‘long term’.
I’ve an idea. If you are a profitable punter (and we know you’re not) do what Ginger does. Post your selections in advance for all to see. Let’s then see how good you are.
No, I didn’t think you would have the balls to do that.
You’re looking for tips, forget it smartass, my methods are forty years in the making, not about to let you profit from them.
I noted his main bets over Friday and Saturday, he was down 62 points on his strongest selections. I hope he was backing 10p a point.
Which clearly shows you don’t understand betting or the words ‘long term’.
I’ve an idea. If you are a profitable punter (and we know you’re not) do what Ginger does. Post your selections in advance for all to see. Let’s then see how good you are.
No, I didn’t think you would have the balls to do that.
You’re looking for tips, forget it smartass, my methods are forty years in the making, not about to let you profit from them.
Thank you so much. Made my day. Brilliant. The biggest laugh I have had all year. Interesting that you now have a ‘method’ when previously your advice was ‘to buy a racehorse, rub shoulders with the cognoscenti, find out where their money is going and follow suit.’ You really are full of bull but hey, you’ve entertained me and given me a good laugh.
You’re looking for tips, forget it smartass, my methods are forty years in the making, not about to let you profit from them.
Oh my God. They’ve landed. Time for bed!
Mike
You’re looking for tips, forget it smartass, my methods are forty years in the making, not about to let you profit from them.
Seriously, I will donate £10 to IJF if you post proof of your ability to turn over a consistent profit.
You don’t have to give away your well honed secrets and you get to prove your credentials as well as silencing the cynics.
You literally have nothing to lose and the IJF has £10 to gain. I will walk you through the technical details of posting proof. If you’re legit then there is absolutely no reason for you to not post this evidence…
Unless of course, you’re lying in order to generate kudos and/or self gratifying attention from a forum which broadly speaking, hasn’t exactly got the highest traffic rate on the internet.
These were my bets in the race in question Woolf:
3:10 Ascot The Ladbroke:
19 points @ 18/1 (WH) Kazilan* (min 15/1)
20 points @ 8/1 (betfair) Cash And Go* (min 7/1)
13 points @ 13/1 (betfair) Lyvius* (min 11/1)
10 points @ 10/1 (L) Cash And Go* (min 7/1)Savers:
9 points @ 7.6/1 (betfair) Balder Success (min 7/1) (£149 available)
7 points @ 10/1 (betfair) Ranjaan (min 10/1) (£674 available)
4 points @ 22/1 (betfair) Cause And Causes (min 18/1) (£159 available)
4 points @ 18.5/1 (betfair) Rattan (min 16/1) (£10 available)Add up percentages of the 7 prices I took:
18/1 = 5.26%
My 8/1 and 10/1 bets on the same horse add up to 8.6/1 = 10.42%
13/1 = 7.14%
7.6/1 = 11.63%
10/1 = 9.09%
22/1 = 4.35%
18.5/1 = 5.13%So adding those percentages up = 53.02% (between 10/11 and 5/6).
In other words had I backed all 7 horses to return the same amount, it would be almost the same as backing ONE horse @ 10/11.
ie If punters are willing to back ONE horse in a race @ 10/11, why should they not want to back 7 horses in one race at a combined price of 10/11 if they believe all 7 horses value?I backed something I considered a 69% true 4/9 chance of winning @ odds of around 10/11… And I got the winner.
Besides, I did not do it that way. I backed 3 horses as main bets and 4 horses as savers. Had I backed the 3 main bets all to return the same amount it would be 5.26% + 10.42% + 7.14% = 22.82%. Taking combined odds of slightly shorter than 7/2 is exactly the same as backing ONE horse at slightly shorter than 7/2.
With a saver of 11.63% + 9.09% + 4.35% + 5.13% = 30.2%. Taking combined odds for the savers of slightly better than 9/4 is exactly the same as backing ONE horse as a saver @ slightly better than 9/4.
So basically my bets were the equivelent of ONE main bet @ 7/2 (that I believed had a true 85/40 chance of winning)… With ONE saver @ 9/4 (that I believed had a true 7/4 chance of winning). The 9/4 saver won Woolf!
Value Is EverythingYou’re looking for tips, forget it smartass, my methods are forty years in the making, not about to let you profit from them.
Seriously, I will donate £10 to IJF if you post proof of your ability to turn over a consistent profit.
You don’t have to give away your well honed secrets and you get to prove your credentials as well as silencing the cynics.
You literally have nothing to lose and the IJF has £10 to gain. I will walk you through the technical details of posting proof. If you’re legit then there is absolutely no reason for you to not post this evidence…
Unless of course, you’re lying in order to generate kudos and/or self gratifying attention from a forum which broadly speaking, hasn’t exactly got the highest traffic rate on the internet.
I throw in a tenner aswell Mr Woolf via TRF just giving page.
http://www.justgiving.com/the-racing-forum-daylight-cup-2011-charity-page/
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
These were my bets in the race in question Woolf:
3:10 Ascot The Ladbroke:
19 points @ 18/1 (WH) Kazilan* (min 15/1)
20 points @ 8/1 (betfair) Cash And Go* (min 7/1)
13 points @ 13/1 (betfair) Lyvius* (min 11/1)
10 points @ 10/1 (L) Cash And Go* (min 7/1)Savers:
9 points @ 7.6/1 (betfair) Balder Success (min 7/1) (£149 available)
7 points @ 10/1 (betfair) Ranjaan (min 10/1) (£674 available)
4 points @ 22/1 (betfair) Cause And Causes (min 18/1) (£159 available)
4 points @ 18.5/1 (betfair) Rattan (min 16/1) (£10 available)Add up percentages of the 7 prices I took:
18/1 = 5.26%
My 8/1 and 10/1 bets on the same horse add up to 8.6/1 = 10.42%
13/1 = 7.14%
7.6/1 = 11.63%
10/1 = 9.09%
22/1 = 4.35%
18.5/1 = 5.13%So adding those percentages up = 53.02% (between 10/11 and 5/6).
In other words had I backed all 7 horses to return the same amount, it would be almost the same as backing ONE horse @ 10/11.
ie If punters are willing to back ONE horse in a race @ 10/11, why should they not want to back 7 horses in one race at a combined price of 10/11 if they believe all 7 horses value?I backed something I considered a 69% true 4/9 chance of winning @ odds of around 10/11… And I got the winner.
Besides, I did not do it that way. I backed 3 horses as main bets and 4 horses as savers. Had I backed the 3 main bets all to return the same amount it would be 5.26% + 10.42% + 7.14% = 22.82%. Taking combined odds of slightly shorter than 7/2 is exactly the same as backing ONE horse at slightly shorter than 7/2.
With a saver of 11.63% + 9.09% + 4.35% + 5.13% = 30.2%. Taking combined odds for the savers of slightly better than 9/4 is exactly the same as backing ONE horse as a saver @ slightly better than 9/4.
So basically my bets were the equivelent of ONE main bet @ 7/2 (that I believed had a true 85/40 chance of winning)… With ONE saver @ 9/4 (that I believed had a true 7/4 chance of winning). The 9/4 saver won Woolf!
There comes a point when addressing a race, any race, when you say sod it, it’s to difficult, this is one of those races to be laid aside and another race looked for. You do not pencil in 7 possibilities, it’s unheard of.
You’re looking for tips, forget it smartass, my methods are forty years in the making, not about to let you profit from them.
Seriously, I will donate £10 to IJF if you post proof of your ability to turn over a consistent profit.
You don’t have to give away your well honed secrets and you get to prove your credentials as well as silencing the cynics.
You literally have nothing to lose and the IJF has £10 to gain. I will walk you through the technical details of posting proof. If you’re legit then there is absolutely no reason for you to not post this evidence…
Unless of course, you’re lying in order to generate kudos and/or self gratifying attention from a forum which broadly speaking, hasn’t exactly got the highest traffic rate on the internet.
I throw in a tenner aswell Mr Woolf via TRF just giving page.
http://www.justgiving.com/the-racing-forum-daylight-cup-2011-charity-page/
Only a tenner Nathan!
Well Woolfie is lying in this thread or my DLAP thread.QUOTE:
"I don’t bet these days but I am intrigued by your unconventional methods".
Value Is EverythingQUOTE:
"I don’t bet these days but I am intrigued by your unconventional methods".I remember that comment actually
Something tells me that the Big Bad Woolf has had a night on the pop and may regret his outburst tomorrow.
QUOTE:
"I don’t bet these days but I am intrigued by your unconventional methods".I remember that comment actually
Something tells me that the Big Bad Woolf has had a night on the pop and may regret his outburst tomorrow.
There is no inconsistency, I ended the year with a modest profit, Cleared one account. I will not bet for a while until I can eliminate long losing runs which are doing my head in. I have to work out where I’m going wrong, eliminate certain kinds of races etc.
There comes a point when addressing a race, any race, when you say sod it, it’s to difficult, this is one of those races to be laid aside and another race looked for. You do not pencil in 7 possibilities, it’s unheard of.
There certainly does "come a point when addressing a race, any race, when you say sod it, it’s to difficult".
But I didn’t find this particular race "too difficult" Woolfie, far from it. There were some horses in the race who’s chances (imo) were vastly over-rated by bookmakers. This in turn made several of the others under-rated / good value bets. Anyone would think I backed the whole field.
I backed 7 horses in a 21 runner race – so I did NOT back 14 horses.No matter how much you huff and puff Woolfie, you will not blow my house down.
Value Is EverythingQUOTE:
"I don’t bet these days but I am intrigued by your unconventional methods".I remember that comment actually
Something tells me that the Big Bad Woolf has had a night on the pop and may regret his outburst tomorrow.
There is no inconsistency, I ended the year with a modest profit, Cleared one account. I will not bet for a while until I can eliminate long losing runs which are doing my head in. I have to work out where I’m going wrong, eliminate certain kinds of races etc.
Perhaps you are not following your own advice. My advice to you is to:
‘buy a racehorse, rub shoulders with the cognoscenti, find out where their money is going and follow suit.’
You nailed it at the seventh attempt after 6 losers. Great form reading, you narrowed it down to seven runners.
You see Woolfie, you do not understand betting for profit. I did not "narrow it down to 7 runners". I never narrow it down, every horse in a race is a potential bet for me, if the odds are big enough.
The 7 horses I backed were NOT neccessarily the 7 horses I thought had the best chance of winning. Certainly did not dismiss the rest… My bets were the 7 horses I thought were VALUE to win.
I did NOT "nail it at the 7th attempt. It was one whole attempt at getting the winner. I nailed it in ONE.
Value Is EverythingYou nailed it at the seventh attempt after 6 losers. Great form reading, you narrowed it down to seven runners.
You see Woolfie, you do not understand betting for profit. I did not "narrow it down to 7 runners". I never narrow it down, every horse in a race is a potential bet for me, if the odds are big enough.
The 7 horses I backed were NOT neccessarily the 7 horses I thought had the best chance of winning. Certainly did not dismiss the rest… My bets were the 7 horses I thought were VALUE to win.
I did NOT "nail it at the 7th attempt. It was one whole attempt at getting the winner. I nailed it in ONE.
Your bookies are perfectly happy to pay out regularly on these bets I assume. I know there are many who might have a problem long term.
I’d give up Ginge he will never understand. He is so full of bull and contradictions in his post. The more porkies he tells the bigger the hole he is digging.
One minute he is a profitable punter who doesn’t want to divulge his expert methods honed over forty years, then he has to see where he his going wrong with his selections and only a few days ago he posted this
‘The Prof is correct, he should have given up betting as I did midway through this last flat season. I check back every now and then to see if anyone other than the Prof has wised up to this pi$$take masquerading as a legitimate sport.
There are a great many horses that are not giving their running rendering any effort to ”study form ” a complete waste of time, an exercise in futility.’
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.