- This topic has 2,646 replies, 45 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Of course someone who has never worked out a 100% book won’t realise this.
And of course anyone who wastes their time ‘Working out a 100% book’ Will realise it makes 100% no difference whatsoever to a horses chance!
Therefore those wasting ‘Valueable’ time have obviously got nothing better to do!!How do you think that serious punters operate then after timer – do you really think they leave everything to chance and totally ignore what the markEt tells them. No doubt you would consider any winner a good price. Simple maths, if you continually back or lay horses at the wrong price YOU WILL LOSE IN THE LONG TERM, but then you know that already, well except in your fantasy world of course.
I suspect the quest for your p**sing pot has a long journey still to make.
A horse can’t run faster because he’s got 2.25% in hand on the field, he can’t improve his conditions either.
There’s no legitimate validity with what you’re doing, it’s just like psychologists are scrutinized in claiming to be a natural science when there’s no reliable construct of interval data that can measure behaviour, physiology and cognitive processes for example, like you could do with time, weights, energy and so on.
It’s just like the Likert Scale, there’s no definite measurement that can specifically tell us the difference between strongly agree and strongly disagree is there? Pretty much like your associate of trying to use a formbook to quantify a selection when every horses formbook is different it makes your process absolute worthless.
I’d like to see the internal consistency of your selections because I’d put my bottom dollar on every horses you’ve given a 25% chance of winning will have different factors associate with them and can you reliably tell me that the formbook between a 25% chance and a 28% chance have any valid categories or items?
To be honest you’re living in a dream land sorry.Mr UH,
Of course every 25% has "different factors associated with them" because every horse’s chance is effected by every other horse’s chance. I use the same form books as bookies odds compilers, so if they can work out a fairly accurate 100% book, why can’t I? Once I’ve studied the form it is possible to see how much better E’s chance is than H, that C has only half of the chance as J etc.Do you get the same form books as me Mr UH? If not, then you haven’t got a clue whether it is possible.
My results suggest I am fairly good at assessing odds. If I was no good I would not be in profit.
Value Is EverythingSo, am i softie or ginge or ginge/softie, who knows, better get Nathan`s opinion again
A mate of mine called Jack got his girlfriend up the duff, when I asked him what is she having? He replied a boy or a girl. Hey, you’re not Jack, are you Softie?
Blackbeard to conquer the World
The Bookmakers are a Business Ginger, they are gambling with every horse in the race not just a selective opinion like your’s hence the odds provide a framework for internal stability so that the company can turn over a profit in the long run which is in fact what they do.
You’re using percentages to select a horses which is nonsense, if someone come in with £2,000 on your book for the favourite what would your value bet be then? you’d probably have a different value you bet for every 30 minutes of the day.
I appreciate what you’re trying to do but there is no validity behind your process and in truth you could be using a pin for the same effect.
The Bookmakers are a Business Ginger, they are gambling with every horse in the race not just a selective opinion like your’s hence the odds provide a framework for internal stability so that the company can turn over a profit in the long run which is in fact what they do.
You’re using percentages to select a horses which is nonsense, if someone come in with £2,000 on your book for the favourite what would your value bet be then? you’d probably have a different value you bet for every 30 minutes of the day.
I appreciate what you’re trying to do but there is no validity behind your process and in truth you could be using a pin for the same effect.
Come off it mate, if I was using a pin I wouldn’t be in profit after 111 pages of tipping. Don’t see how you can say there is "no validity".
The bookmaker’s odds compiler’s "process" of making a 100% book is exactly the same as mine – only I do not add to that 100% by adding a mark up. So I don’t know what you are talking about in your second paragraph.
Value Is EverythingGreat post Hurdy, and at such a time in the morning too!!
I find myself in total agreement with much of what you say, and i would comment on individual points made.
Making up your own book as a punter gives you no advantage whatsoever unless you know something they don’t and if you do then I might too and while you are spending hours making up a book I’m going round the bookies taking all the 10’s and you end up getting 3’s
I believe it can, particularly the higher the grade of racing where horses are far more likely to be running on merit, but i agree that it can take a lot of time to do, when coupled with finding the bets also.
You certainly don’t need to make up a book to dutch or to realize if you back 7 8/1 shots and 2 win you are going to make a profit.
To win at Dutching you need a very high strike rate which Ginger does not have. Or you need to be prepared to finance losing runs and not wilt when you are thousands of pounds go down the drain.
I have already shown how little Ginger would make in a month if betting to 1 point = 1 pound and I can’t see how anyone would want to do what he does for such a small profit over such along period of time.
A good point, but it does work for ginge, and the beauty is that he does all the work so anyone following doesn`t have to. Tailor it to your own pattern and ginge does have the ability to pick winners.
We can all do sums and it doesn’t take a genius to go to a few of Ginger’s pages and find a losing run where if betting to 10 quid a point it’s enough to scare the living daylights out of any every day punter……..you’d be so fed up shovelling cash onto horses you looked at and thought how the fook could anyone chose that thing it had no chance….because when losing that’s how the mind works and you always blame someone else.
Yes, i would be interested to see how many of the horses backed at say 14`s and over oblige, again, particularly in better quality races. Would certainly not suit every punter by any means, but following blind still works, believe me.
The thing about me is I have along memory and when I was debating this system of Gingers with him a few years back he defended it tooth and nail then as he does now but you know what sticks in my mind?He told me that using this method he wanted to become a professional gambler.
But now he says he’s happy making peanuts because his system/idea has been found to have major flaws in it making it near impossible to make the real money he dreamed about.
To be fair, he does not need to make a fortune given his circumstances, and he does make the profits he needs.
You just need to grab one of his bets like the one he was explaining to me the other day and multiply the points by 10 to come up with"280 pounds @ 15/2 (VC) Suzi’s A Class Act* (min 13/2)
220 points @ 11/1 (VC) Stock Hill Fair* (min 17/2)
Saver:
190 points @ 11/4 (Sky) Malekov (min 5/2)690 quid laid out and in the same day add to that 459 quid bet on the same day they all lose you’d soon be sicked if 4 or 5 went down the Suwanee and your out of pocket 6k or so before you know it.
Ok so you don’t start at a tenner you start at a couple of quid and work your way up but as I keep saying/asking who the fook is going to lay you? They’ll offer sp so the value you seek has gone your system is immediately fooked..no value no bet no Ginger because they’d all close his accounts if he showed any sort of profit at all. If you think not then your mad.
Calculate how much he would have won if all bets were at SP he’d most likely have lost a fortune. I am guessing of course.
Ginger’s thread is harmless it’s good to watch but it simply is not practical.
Don`t agree here, but that`s not to say it can`t be improved
Enter TAPK who knows it’s not….. says so and is sick of the constant barage of percentages and lecturing.
But was there any need to become so aggressive and launch a continued abusive attack which still continues?
Then I got the guy telling me I need lessons in maths ffs.
I’m clever enough to spot shyte when I see it and to know if Ginger was actually betting for real money he wouldn’t be sticking a couple of hundred quid on 35/1 shots.
Well no, and he doesn`t, but he does bet for very real money.
The thing is when you are not betting for real money there is no fear but ask someone to put 50 quid on a horse that looks to have no chance and they will chicken out…That is the nature of the beast.
Ginger because there is no risk can throw selection up after selection and end up showing a profit but in reality you’d need some pair of balls to follow him. a lot bigger than most people on here have.
That is probably true.
The top and bottom of it is you don’t need to make a book to do what he is doing and value has got sweet fanny adams to do with it.
[
u]You may be right, but i would defend his right to do it
It is a simple numbers game and without studying I could throw selections up that will show a profit as long as II don’t have to back it up with hard cash.
No bank no pounds per point just bluster is how I see this thread………plus I am sick of being lectured to be someone I could buy at one end of the town and sell at the other with the money I have made from gambling.
Well perhaps you could share a few of these gambles with the Forum, or i am not looking in the right place?
There should be a rule on this forum that anyone who wants to use it blow their own trumpet must prove they are actually betting these horses themselves.
Ah, just like TAPK for example then…..btw i have every reason to believe that ginge backs up his selections with hard cash.
A good dutcher would never get involved in most races Gingers chooses to bet in there’s way too much left to chance.
Again, not sure i would agree here, as he concentrates mostly on top end stuff, where chance/temperament issues are considerably reduced.
They seek the races that look like a 2 horse race where the 3rd horse is being offered at long odds.
The 1st at Wetherby for example.
Missisipi Blues 3.70 Liberty Gift 3.70 the next horse in the betting is I shot the Sherriff at 7.8.
The market could change but if those were the prices available near the off and there was absolutely no money for any of the unexposed horses the good Dutcher would do one of 3 things
He could bet the first 2 in the betting to either takes out say 400 pound or back all 3
Alternatively he could back Missisppi Blues with the horse he thinks has the best chance off winning.
The odds of success are huge because most of the others will need the experience or are there just for the run. Unlike other types of races.
If he back all 3 at worse he’ll make an easy 100 pound or if one of the two front ones stoats he’ll make nearly 200 pound.
Dutching is not the same as singles and backing odds on overall when Dutching very often you are likely to do so but the odds on rule of eventually you’ll lose simply doesn’t apply
If the punter only backs the first two and one wins for 300 invested he’ll make about 250 quid again odds on but so it should be if the horses just run to their abilities
One of the front ones with MB at 7.8 then he’s make over 230 if MB wins and about 325 quid if the shorter priced horse you chose wins.
Pick and chose which races you back in and the risk of you losing any great amount is zero..if you are a good judge you could make a small fortune. The take out stake can be anything you like. 20quid 500 quid you’ll get matched no problem unlike Gingers fantasy thread.
Of the above why be greedy back all 3 any time a decent profit can be made as a lot of 100-200 quids is more likely than a lot of 350 quids.
I ran the thing for 9 days or so was never in danger of losing my bank, backed willy nilly in nearly every race without thought or any sense to it and still won 100 quid.
It was an experiment and there is no doubt in my mind being selective and keeping things realistic there’s a lot of money to be made doing it my way.
That is what interests me personally, but do you feel that you need to cover runners down to a certain price and also look to achieve a min. roi per race?
If Ginger would get off his high horse scrap the bookmaking and % look for the right races with a sensible achievable staking plan he’d make a fortune IMO.
That will be almost impossible to do imo, as ginge is very much in a comfort zone right now, and would see no need to change.
I will prove it as soon as my friends go back to oz, I’m sober and a staff party planned is out of the way.
I look forward to this Hurdy, i feel that it will be a very interesting project.
I ask you Ginger to give it a try my way and I betya a banana and a half to a plum you start making real profits..you only need a grand to get going with a take out of 100 quid and increase by 50 quid everytime your back goes up 500 quid.
Just start anew thread mate and do both, you don’t even have to play for real money but I know I am right……stop fooking about and lets see some real Dutching done as it should be done instead of throwing fictitious shyte at a wall.
Fictitious no, suggest you look in the direction of other members for that p[articular practice
Gongertipster MK2 could run one thread and you could run the other
As Billy the Kid once said "I’ll make you famous"
To make my position clear, no, i am not ginge in another guise, nor do i look like a wookie in a carrot, far uglier i`m afraid
I have known ginge for many years and meet up with regularly at a number of racecourses I agree that he is very single minded about the way he bets, but i do assure you that he does what he says he does, and i would again defend his right to carry it out.
Yes the lectures can be ott, and we all have been subjected to them, however he puts the work in and is prepared to share his findings/selections.If you do not like his thread then it it easily passed over.
I joined the forum some time ago to see how ginge was progressing, and have only popped in infrequently to watch progress hence posts on his thread only, but i am afraid that the relentless attack on him, particularly from someone whose own credentials are at best suspect imo, unacceptable.
Best of luck to all.
All this bickering is rather boring.
Its all really simple;
Ginge backs horses that, and this bit is really important, HE thinks are over priced. He doesn’t limit himself to one over priced horse per race. If he thinks 3 are over priced he backs them.
He establishes his belief that the horse is over priced through his knowledge of horse racing.
How do we measure how good Ginge is at spotting overpriced horses?
We look at his results, and they show a steady 12% return on stake. Over a long period of time as well.
TAPK moans that there are too many percentages, but he uses the same method. He backs horses that he believes are over priced. He just doesn’t have such a scientific method.
Anyone that turns a profit from regularly placing money with a bookmaker is doing well in my book. That people want to argue now about the level of profit is a compliment to Ginge.
On the downside, i don’t like this thread that much! Ginge has proven he can spot over priced horses, but i prefer the discusssion as to why the horse is over priced. I also like to stand and cheer one horse on (go on my cocker, go on, go on, YES, you beauty). I like to feel that i worked it out, that i found the winner. And this thread doesn’t offer that.
Can we stop challenging Ginges system, its clearly it works.
Ginge – you do not need to defend yourself. You have shown consistant and regular profit. That is the defence. Rather than spending the time offering maths lessons, give us some race analysis – this horse is overpriced in my view because………
Any how, just my thoughts. This used to be a really interesting part of the forum before all the bickering.
And Post of the year goes to ‘Fist’! superb stuff particularly pointing out the glaringly obvious "Why does Ginge bother to make a book in the first place when Professional Odds compilers do it all for us"?? Game Set and Match Fisty Well done! At last old ‘Softie’ admits to being ‘Ginges’ Siamese twin at least! I wont ask where they are bonded mind!!
Well GT’s DL&P’s thread has really taken off and he’ll reach the double century (of pages) quicker than AP normally does over jumps!
I think the debate sums up the contrasts between the "scientific" versus "artistic" approaches to betting. Note I think there’s room for both and there is no right or wrong approach.
I’ve never backed any horse on GTs recommendation but I do note most of his selections are in the top 6 of the betting. As I said to him a couple of threads ago I often wonder if he is wasting his time and money placing savers all the time. Why not keep the stakes and put them down on firmer selections? If you can spot value why place savers? Surely in the long run value wagers will be profitable and non value wagers are hits to the bottom line? In his defence he makes a steady profit and there’s not a lot of us about that can say this. I often wonder why he (and others) waste their time putting their bets up on here. Is it self gratification or to simulate debate?
I see GTs 100% books as a long winded way of working out the value. Some guys can see it instantly. Maybe GT needs to work out his book to see it – I don’t know.
I do detest when GT goes into "Headmaster" mode on various threads. I’ve been sorely tempted to tell him so but time constraints and my overriding rule of not getting into long debates trying to prove who is right ensure I hold my tongue with him and others.
In his defence GTs betting strategy clearly works for him at his current level. Whether he can sustain this, and make a living, at a professional level I don’t know but good luck to him. I do think the ongoing challenging of his methods is a bit uncalled for but up to him how he responds to that!
And Post of the year goes to ‘Fist’! superb stuff particularly pointing out the glaringly obvious
"Why does Ginge bother to make a book in the first place when Professional Odds compilers do it all for us"??
Game Set and Match Fisty Well done! At last old ‘Softie’ admits to being ‘Ginges’ Siamese twin at least! I wont ask where they are bonded mind!!
Duh!
A punter is trying to find
individual
odds which are
greater
than what he (the punter) believes the
fair
chance is. A bookmaker is working to an
over-round
so just
copying
the bookmaker will
NOT
show a
profit
.
Value Is EverythingAnd Post of the year goes to ‘Fist’! superb stuff particularly pointing out the glaringly obvious
"Why does Ginge bother to make a book in the first place when Professional Odds compilers do it all for us"??
Game Set and Match Fisty Well done! At last old ‘Softie’ admits to being ‘Ginges’ Siamese twin at least! I wont ask where they are bonded mind!!
Duh!
A punter is trying to find
individual
odds which are
greater
than what he (the punter) believes the
fair
chance is. A bookmaker is working to an
over-round
so just
copying
the bookmaker will
NOT
show a
profit
.
No a value punter is seeking to get over the odds. Not all punters are the same. Being able to identify horses at "over the odds" does not make them good bets. It is helpful to be able to identify such prices, but it is far more important to learn when not to bet. You have recently been advising reducing stakes due to uncertain or poor going conditions, most often the best advice when the going is changeable is to keep hold of your stake.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.