- This topic has 12 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Have you tried this method, it can be as good as hours of from study.
List your successes here.
Many years ago I worked for a publisher of horse racing books etc that ran astaff naps table. The most frequent winner was the tea lady who picked horses with names she liked.
Many years ago I worked for a publisher of horse racing books etc that ran astaff naps table. The most frequent winner was the tea lady who picked horses with names she liked.
Ha Ha, that’s excellent,
A friend of mine returned from holiday in Egypt and first day back bet on a horse named sphinx, it won at 50/1
Woolfie,
You’re right!
Unless a punter who "studys form" allows forvalue
he/she just as well use a hat pin.
Those trying to pick the horse with the best chance of winning through "studying form" will invariably pick the favourite, agreeing with bookmakers. ie Bookmakers (or the market) makes a horse favourite when they believe it has the best chance of winning, hence offering shorter odds…
But the favourite may or may not be value. ie Unless the punter gets value with his shorter priced horses he does not win enough times to make a profit! Just as the Hat Pin method used by the Tea Lady picks horses at bigger prices who may or may not be value. Difference being the Tea Lady is far more likely to pick the one big priced winner that pays for the rest of her selections.
The Tea Lady has a better chance of making a profit.
Value Is Everything“Luck enters into every contingency. You are a fool if you forget it – and a greater fool if you count upon it.”
Mike
“Luck enters into every contingency. You are a fool if you forget it – and a greater fool if you count upon it.”
Mike
I’ve never found him that insightful to be honest
Woolfie,
You’re right!
Unless a punter who "studys form" allows forvalue
he/she just as well use a hat pin.
Those trying to pick the horse with the best chance of winning through "studying form" will invariably pick the favourite, agreeing with bookmakers. ie Bookmakers (or the market) makes a horse favourite when they believe it has the best chance of winning, hence offering shorter odds…
But the favourite may or may not be value. ie Unless the punter gets value with his shorter priced horses he does not win enough times to make a profit! Just as the Hat Pin method used by the Tea Lady picks horses at bigger prices who may or may not be value. Difference being the Tea Lady is far more likely to pick the one big priced winner that pays for the rest of her selections.
The Tea Lady has a better chance of making a profit.
Interesting theory. It’s pretty much a lottery these days below class 2.
Speaking of a hat pin ….last night in Kempton we had a 66/1 ranker , in a class 7 race , read his form ….beaten more lengths than sinking the Titanic …….Woolfie must have been loving it
Low grade is a lottery , and what’s more because of the losing mentality , ie , lose more please , we want your money ….nobody will say a dickie bird
Pathetic , but thats where we are
Keep loving it people , its the future !!!!
imo
Ricky
Speaking of a hat pin ….last night in Kempton we had a 66/1 ranker , in a class 7 race , read his form ….beaten more lengths than sinking the Titanic …….Woolfie must have been loving it
Low grade is a lottery , and what’s more because of the losing mentality , ie , lose more please , we want your money ….nobody will say a dickie bird
Pathetic , but thats where we are
Keep loving it people , its the future !!!!
imo
Ricky
That winner’s ability was seriously disguised, or maybe he was the only one trying, go figure. Hope you backed it friend.
No Wolfie , I did not have a bet , I dont bet on low grade because results like this can happen
This stuff makes me sick , its driving punters to the roulette and the virtual racing in droves … yet nobody says a word
the deck chairs are being re arranged quietly ,..,
imo
Ricky
No Wolfie , I did not have a bet , I dont bet on low grade because results like this can happen
This stuff makes me sick , its driving punters to the roulette and the virtual racing in droves … yet nobody says a word
the deck chairs are being re arranged quietly ,..,
imo
Ricky
What
"makes me sick"
is people like you two. Making out any result your poor race reading skills can not fathom to be
"pathetic"
or
"seriously disguised"
etc. You really haven’t thought this one through Ricky/Woolfie… yet again.
If Until The Man’s 66/1 win was a deliberate attempt to cheat, then why did it go off @ 66/1?
Surely if connections knew the horse had a much better chance than odds suggested they’d have backed the thing? But let’s look at the other evidence:
Won at
12 furlongs
at Kempton.
Last time out Until The Man had run over 2m, (that’s
2 miles
) at Wolves, last of 11 off a mark of 48. Before that had run poorly in five hurdle races.
His flat race before that was
less than a mile
in 2011.
Before that, had been off7 months
before a poor run at 10f.
Before that,7 furlongs
again.
Before that, on 22nd Dec 2010 ran off amark of 65
(that’s
20 lbs
higher than this week)! 6th of 10. Putting up a Timeform Rating
just 3 lbs less
than Until The Man put up this week.
Before that, 4th of 8 at 10f, this time putting up aTimeform Rating 7 lbs BETTER than Thursday
, at the same
course
as Thursdy.
Of course I am not saying Until The Man had a good chance of winning this week. He was rightly an outsider. But there were reasons why you could legitimately see how this 66/1 shot won.
Until The Man’s has always been inconsistent, possibly through injury. One reason why horses are in this grade is their inconsistency and temperament. He’s also always been best at middle distances.
If results like these are
"driving punters to the roulette and the virtual racing in droves"
, it is because people like you convince them of something that just is not there!
66/1 shots win the amount of races 66/1 should statistically win. Get over it!
Value Is EverythingStudy as much as you can, only bet when you think you’ve got value and record your profit (if you make one)., At the end of the season, deduct from the profit the costs of your studying (form books, heating, trips to racecourse, entrance money, internet connection, racecards, racing papers etc.) How is your profit now?
Calculate how many hours per week – roughly – you spend on your studying to calculate your hourly rate, then apply for a job at your local coffee shop to do better! (If not as much fun).
Also, at the start of the season, have a random method for one or two bets per day (maybe the first horse on a card whose name begins with the same letter as its jockey / or the first horses to have 2 of the same consonants in its name, eg "SS" or "FF". How would you have fared if you’d just used this method? (Bear in mind the cost of study is almost nil, you just need the list of runners). Then ask yourself at the end of the season, when comparing the random return to the study return – was it all worth it?
If you think your methods are that good, you must seriously run a random selection method alongside by which to compare it.
I’m not a believer in systems, but, however contrary to common sense it may seem, rather think that a random system will nearly always beat a so-called form system – you might still make a loss, but less of a loss
. (There are solid logical and mathematical reasons why this is so, but it’s dry-as-ditchwater stuff)
If I were a teenager again and knew what I think I know now, I would have made one or two radical changes to my gambling. It wouldn’t be "random" selections (in spite of what I’ve said above). The main change would have been….
But that’s for another thread.
Surely if connections knew the horse had a much better chance than odds suggested they’d have backed the thing? 
. (There are solid logical and mathematical reasons why this is so, but it’s dry-as-ditchwater stuff)- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.