Killjoy – sorry

[Steve SB]

I agree Matron. A system should be a logical process which always produces the same selection.

Of course it is OK to adjust a system with gut-feel, but then, as Rocco states this is then a "method" or an "approach" because there is some unquantifiable component.

The advantage of a 100% system is that you can easily work out historical performance (provided you have software and a database…) whereas to apply gut feel, each race needs to be considered seperately.

I guess gut-feel may be an observation (e.g. this system never seems to work well in maidens) which may, in the fullness of time, with enough data, be proved to be an extra part of the system itself.

Steve

[Keith the teeth]

Something that I feel is very important that I don’t remember being mentioned is that it is worthwhile analysing a system to find out in which price band the profit lies in.  eg I have one that appears to work well between 7/4 – 15/2 but loses money below or above these figures.  Yet again to get an accurate figure you need lots of data.

[Seagull]

Matron,<br>what is the type of system you would use then throw in the magic words ‘gut feeling’!<br>I think that this thread is VERY enlightening!<br>We all live by systems like it or not!<br>We all stop on red lights and go on green what would happen if we decided to apply gut feeling and think well<br>most of the time lights go red I shoiuld stop but I have a gut feeling?<br>Even people who bet on the names of a grandson have a system (it may not be good but that is what it is) but why have a gut feeling and decide I always back any name with John but this time I fancy Mary?

I may be rigid in this thinking but OVERALL I know it works!<br>A great subject…….keep posting

[Matron]

Another point is what returns are people looking for in a system?  I think personally peoples expectations are far too high.

I think if you can make an average profit of say 5pts LSP<br>per month and gradually increase your bank to say backing to 200-00 level stakes, then you returns take on a different complexion than if you were backing to 5-00 level stakes

Anybody else got any thoughts on this one?

Regards – Matron<br>:cool:

[Obiwan]

Matron<br>Completely agree,<br>5-10pts LSP a month is what I’m aiming for.<br>Then You can start at around £25 level stakes and then build up through compounding.

[Daylight]

This is the concept that makes most people lose as I never ‘got it’ until somone pointed the obvious to me that my aims were too high and I would ALWAYS fail long term.

I now aim for between 5-20pts profit per 100pts staked which sounds low but if I can continue to add these mounts eventually (as my bank builds) 5-20pts will be a lot of money.

To be serious you have to leave the greed behind.

[rory]

It seems the major problem with effective systems is the inability to apply common sense within a system when a selection represents poor value due to market forces (Keith the Teeth made a valid point about profitability within price ranges).<br> <br>I believe an effective system should provide not a selection, but a market for the event in question.  What you then bet on depends on the "live" market on the race.  The ideal system will highlight horses which should be underbet, and mathematical analysis of the market will determine if the selection is a definite bet or not – for example you may determine that a selection merits a bet if its "true" odds are 20% better than those offered in the ring.

The other thing to remember is that the tissue prices supplied to bookies are simply the result of particular scoring systems, the most basic of which divides the number of positive scoring factors exhibited by a single runner in a race by the total number of positive factors added across the entire field.

[Matron]

I suppose Seagull if you are faced with two selections that meet your criteria very closely.

Then, I suppose you apply further filters in your mind – if  one of the selections has the "Pipe/McCoy" combination would it be better than say "Murphy/McNamara"?

It is a difficult question to answer and I will have to ponder more on this one.

Regards – Matron<br>:cool:

[Seagull]

simple answer is no obvious answer is back them both<br>

[johngringo]

The more criteria a system has, the more likely it is to be quite definate about the selection. However the more criteria a system has the fewer the selections indicated. The thing to do is to strike the medium that gives the most return. Now that betting tax has been abolished there are a lot of systems that can be worked upon to return a profit. Without turning this thread into a specific discussion I´d like to use an example. Any system that doesn´t already use these two criteria will be blessed by their adoption. Demand that the selection comes from a stable inform (there´s a tick in the appropriate box in the RP), and that the going agrees with it (same tick, same box). 5pts per month is quite achievable without having to tie ourselves in knots. Cheers John  

[Daylight]

#Moderation Mode

<a href=”https://theracingforum.co.uk/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=23&topic=10&#8243; target=”_self”>Moved here</a>

[Author]

Posts