- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
In Racing Ahead magazine, we have a writer – Fenman – who takes a methodical approach to his betting. Over the years, he has come up with several methods and I thought I would post his latest one here (from the February edition) to see if it chimes with anyone discussing systems here.<br>It draws on a system from the dark ages based on low weights in National Hunt handicaps. The basic idea is to look for horses that are carrying as close to the jockey’s natural weight as possible, with the least amount of dead weight in the saddle.<br>The rules are:<br>Handicap races only<br>1. Note the three most successful jockeys at the meeting as identified by any daily paper (ie most number of wins at the course)<br>2. The selection in a race is any horse ridden by one of the top three jockeys that carries less than 11st<br>3. Where there is more than one qualifier, take the mount of the jockey that has ridden the most winners at the course<br>This might sound flaky but there have been some excellent results this season.<br>Any thoughts would be very interesting.
It does not sound flaky at all.
Systems go out of fashion as soon as they start losing money and people go onto something new. It is well worth looking back, as everything goes in cycles – and back into profit.
Please feel free if you wish post the selections up.
Regards- Matron<br>:cool:
I very much agree about the fashionable nature of systems and the fact that people are always reluctant to take a long-term view of anything in betting!<br>I will post selections up time permitting.
Tuesday, Feb 13<br>Folkestone<br>1.40 Bite Un Fight (T Murphy, joint third with Sam Thomas)<br>3.40 Cervinia Two (AP McCoy)<br>
Hi Mulls,
I think the ‘best jockey’ bit has more logic than the ‘less dead weight in the saddle’ bit. Horsemanship is, in my opinion, still underated by systemites. Dead weight in the saddle makes very little difference if the rider is a top jockey.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.