- This topic has 56 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
I’ll bite
So the Coolmore Mafia are happy losing the millions in stud fees for the £60,000 that wouldn’t even buy one leg of a typical yearling purchase?
1/10 for making me respond.
It saddens me that you have so much a shallow perspective of the racing experience. Such an attitude can’t be good for a contented soul
I haven’t had a bet all year yet I’ve managed to thoroughly enjoy racing as much as anybody possibly could. Watching the likes of Big Bucks, Sprinter Sacre and Frankel has given me immense pleasure as has savouring the simple delights of racedays at the Hexhams, Market Rasens and Ludlows of this broad and fascinating world.
Horse racing, very much like life itself, is what you make of it. There is a veritable smorgasbord of delicious treats available to the open minded sojourner. But if you’re going to focus on the irrelevant mouldy pastie that’s rolled onto the carpet then obviously, you will find it distasteful.
No argument, then. Just a [expletive] metaphor. On your way, sonny.
Whenever I have made anything resembling an argument as a response to your opinions that you have dared others to challenge, you simply dismiss or ignore it. I predict that the points in the two above posts I’ve chosen from memory will remain blissfully unanswered. Could this be because my assertions are always constructed in such a salient, cogent and watertight manner that it would be a redundant endeavour to even attempt a counter argument? Or could it be that you are such a pitifully lonely individual that you post solely to get responses on an internet forum because positive or negative, the attention you receive here is more meaningful than anything you find in the real world?
My ego and my increasing concern for your wellbeing would dearly like for it to be the former. However, if it is the latter, here’s a present from me to you in the hope that it will prevent you from "doing anything stupid" over Christmas.
(((Professortrubshawe)))
Would also like to know why FOBT addicts are not considered on here as victims of their own stupidity, but people who lose at racing are.
???
The only explanation I can produce is that turf gamblers are smug and purblind.
Maybe because FOBTs are 100% luck. You’re basically betting that you’re going to be lucky. For example, why do you think red has a better chance than black on a spin of roulette? Has it been in good form lately? Has black been under the weather? There’s no reasoning to it other than hoping for the best. In horse racing there is reasoning. You can formulate an opinion as to why such a horse could win, just as the bookies do, and back your opinion against the bookies. Of course, there is an element of luck, just as there is in all sports. Therefore FOBT cannot be fairly compared to horse racing betting, or betting on football or poker etc. for that matter.
Purblind?
Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own?Further thoughts: anyone who denies that the game revolves around concealed information should consider that there are LAWS about about what its practitioners can and can’t say! I mean
come on
Anyone who does not buy the tools can not expect to do the job well.
One mans "concealed information" is another mans known information.If I have one grumble these days it’s that there isn’t enough concealed information. So much information is in the public domain that there’s not so information to dig out that gives an edge. It is there, principally on course or thinking out of the box, but it does need hard work to find it. Which is where I came in on this thread…
Rob
Prof i really think that if you are going to continue you should watch the videos with James Willoughby and Hugh Taylor I referred to in the Form factor post. https://theracingforum.co.uk/horse-r … =3&t=92137
Lets tackle the delusions of the orphaned son of Father Christmas.
Yes, the majority are supposed to lose. That’s what makes my assertion of the shabbiness of the sport unarguable. Let’s put it in another context. The loans business is shabby; the estate agent business is shabby. Yes, it must be that way BUT it is still shabby. You must understand that when someone makes an assertion about a business it is
no answer at all
to come bustling and read the riot act by saying well it has to be like that cos otherwise it would not exist. OBVIOUSLY that is the case.Either you’re wanting to extrapolate this debate into why the capitalism system is flawed and unfair, or you are framing this within your irrelevant disgruntled delusions as to why you can’t successful gamble.
At best you’re incoherent, at worst, you’d be Gingertipsters underwear.
Four days of Cheltenham is too much.
Personally, i agree … however this has no relevance to anything else posted.
See name of thread.
There is too much training in public. Maybe they should make card declarations: this horse is being trained today.
This doesn’t even mean anything.
Yes it does. It means what it says. Today there will be a lot of horses that are being trained in public but presented to the markets as a genuine betting option. This is a con which is allowed to go on as a customary part of the ‘game’. Nonetheless it is a deception of the public. You know it is a con. It is no different to some wide boy playing find the lady with no queen on the table.
You haven’t explained what training horses in public is. I assume it is a figure of speech that is simply you being disgruntled by some comments and thoughts stemming from some important actors within the industry. Or rather, you’re inability to be perceptive ; to understand what has value and what doesn’t.
If you’re stupid enough to be fooled by hyperbole and such, then you’re stupid. Nothing is a con. It is within a supposed free will framework ; no one is forcing anybody to gamble or make decisions. If people are gullible enough to fool for manipulations, then that isn’t our problem. Manipulation and edges aren’t cons.
The voice of experience. I can promise you that when a jockey says that his horse is most unlikely to win. It is a connivance of the industry. You are saying something different from the point I am making. You are saying, well, it IS information if you choose to read it that way. Well, may be. My point is that if you’ve had a bet in the morning and your jockey says that on Channel 4 just before the off, you better see if you can lay off your investment. Which is not fun, which is a ball-ache. Another irritating element.
You can’t promise anything. No data, just an inkling you have developed from your own experiences ; experiences which are biased in many ways. Of course most will lose ; because most horses lose. Shocking, i know.
The problem with the absurd irrational above is that you’ve worked out that this has happened to a few times and extrapolated that to every decision. Somewhat natural, but nonetheless absolutely stupid. If you’ve had a bet and the jockey then says something positive, it in no way suddenly reduces the chances of that horse. Jockeys words have no impact on the variables that play out the race.
It isn’t difficult to see why you are unsuccessful at gambling. You create little theories based on biased agendas and small sample sizes and extrapolate that to outcomes that have no relation to "data" of this theories.
You seem to not have understood the title of this thread. It wasn’t ‘can you help me’, it was ‘other thoughts on packing the game in.’
More like, "bitter bull**** rhetoric from an individual who knows far less about "the game" than he thinks he knows". You’re a walking, talking, (who knows, stalking too???) contradiction filled with some many irrational thoughtd and conspiracies.
There speaks the authentic voice of the turf. They probably said the same thing when children worked in wool mills.
Yes. Excellent analogy. Exactly the same.
Further thoughts: anyone who denies that the game revolves around concealed information should consider that there are LAWS about about what its practitioners can and can’t say! I mean
come on
Anyone who does not buy the tools can not expect to do the job well.
One mans "concealed information" is another mans known information.If I have one grumble these days it’s that there isn’t enough concealed information. So much information is in the public domain that there’s not so information to dig out that gives an edge. It is there, principally on course or thinking out of the box, but it does need hard work to find it. Which is where I came in on this thread…
Rob
In some ways I agree Rob. Timeform now give a bit of information out for free on betfair. However, thankfully not enough is there (imo) to do away with the edge subscribing gives. On the other hand, there is so much misleading information out there that other punters take in to account – to make things easier for me in other ways.
Value Is EverythingThe 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$$take masquerading as a legitimate sport.
There are a great many horses that are not giving their running rendering any effort to ”study form ” a complete waste of time, an exercise in futility.
The Prof is correct, he should have given up betting as I did midway through this last flat season. I check back every now and then to see if anyone other than the Prof has wised up to this pi$$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.
Oh dear. Someone else who can’t make it pay and has to blame everything else other than himself.
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$$take masquerading as a legitimate sport.
There are a great many horses that are not giving their running rendering any effort to ”study form ” a complete waste of time, an exercise in futility.
Of course there is some pixxtaking going on Woolf, but it is far less than you make out.
If you are right Woolf, how do you explain my two Daily Lays And Plays threads making a good profit?
I have NO inside information, it’s done SOLELY by "studying form". Both threads have been going for more than a year with hundreds of bets and NO individual win/s responsible for a big chunk of that profit. So luck/coincidence does not come in to it.
It’s not a "complete waste of time" for me Woolf.
Value Is EverythingOver 100 years ago Pittsburgh Phil, one of the most successful punters of his day wrote:
"The less one thinks of crookedness and trickery in racing the more successful will be his handicapping."
"Look for defect in your own calculating rather than cheating of others."
Year after year, 30% of favourites on form win their races.
Year after year, 98% of self deluded punters lose, and they always will.The Prof is correct, he should have given up betting as I did midway through this last flat season. I check back every now and then to see if anyone other than the Prof has wised up to this pi$$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.
Of course there is some pixxtaking going on Woolf, but it is far less than you make out.
If you are right Woolf, how do you explain my two Daily Lays And Plays threads making a good profit?
I have NO inside information, it’s done SOLELY by "studying form". Both threads have been going for more than a year with hundreds of bets and NO individual win/s responsible for a big chunk of that profit. So luck/coincidence does not come in to it.
It’s not a "complete waste of time" for me Woolf.
I’ve tried your method using £s not ”points”, you frequently put up three runners in a race and still fail to find a winner, it’s nerdy nonsense. I followed your picks for a while but I didn’t open a numbered bank account in Switzerland. I would go mental if I had to bet against myself day after day which is what your method amounts to. Only a deranged anorak would entertain such a convoluted method.
Surely the way to make it pay is to specialize IE :say only bet in group races or something similar.
Yes trainers know their horses I was lucky enough to do a job at a local trainer asked him if there was anything to keep an eye on he gave me one horse won 2’1 fell won 6’4 won 13’2 pu last five runs don’t think you can complain about that information case of being in the right place at the right time.
Betting is like anything in life you will only get out what you are prepared to put in.
So if you are not prepared to put the effort in then the only option is to give up.
And when you have made your selection and it goes wrong who do you blame you made the choice surely the responsibility is yours and yours alone.Surely the way to make it pay is to specialize IE :say only bet in group races or something similar.
Yes trainers know their horses I was lucky enough to do a job at a local trainer asked him if there was anything to keep an eye on he gave me one horse won 2’1 fell won 6’4 won 13’2 pu last five runs don’t think you can complain about that information case of being in the right place at the right time.
Betting is like anything in life you will only get out what you are prepared to put in.
And when you have made your selection and it goes wrong who do you blame you made the choice surely the responsibility is yours and yours alone.If you take betting seriously the vast amount of racing – much of it complete dross – means you have no alternative but to specialise. I don’t think it is coincidence that I have consistently achieved better results on a Sunday – less meetings/quality Irish racing – than Saturdays where the odds have increasingly become loaded against punters.
Your third paragragh appears to contradict the second. You got a tip from a trainer – that doesn’t strike me as putting the effort in just that you got lucky and were in the right place at the right time.
Yes, it is much better to form your own opinions but you cannot blame yourself when jockeys mess up which happens too often – as I said before they ‘lose’ far more races than they win.
I’ve tried your method using £s not ”points”, you frequently put up three runners in a race and still fail to find a winner, it’s nerdy nonsense. I followed your picks for a while but I didn’t open a numbered bank account in Switzerland. I would go mental if I had to bet against myself day after day which is what your method amounts to. Only a deranged anorak would entertain such a convoluted method.
Woolf
There’s no call to belittle others just because their methods don’t suit you. GT seems knowledgeable and successful enough to me. All he does is play the percentages, just as bookmakers do every day. Bookmakers presumably manage to do it successfully on a regular, testified by their continued presence, so why on earth shoudln’t a deidcated punter be able to do the same thing?
For various reasons I’ve not been betting much in the past year or two, but my most successful periods have been betting in a similar way to GingerTipster. Of course backing three in a race doesn’t guarantee a winner, and if you think otherwise you are naive in the extreme. If you right horses however, and get on at the right odds, it does give you a chance of coming out on the right side.
Far from being convoluted I suspect his method is essentially fairly straightforward. They may take time, but that doesn’t make them convoluted.
I’m probably p***ing in the wind here, but we ‘deranged anoraks’ jhave to stick together. If ever you are at Kelso let me know and you can come up and meet the ‘Top Of The Roof Deranged Anoraks Club’ enjoying our racing on a regular basis.
Rob
Yes, it is much better to form your own opinions but you cannot blame yourself when jockeys mess up which happens too often – as I said before they ‘lose’ far more races than they win.
..and footballers snap at shots and miss a chance for a goal, or defenders misjudge a challenge, or cricketers nibble at one outside off stump, or a golfer misjudges a putt. Sportsmen who make the least mistakes are the ones who are most successful. Plenty of people bet on the sports mentioned, some very successfully.
Similarly jockeys who make the least mistakes are the ones who end up at or near the top of the tree. It’s factored into the ‘sh** happens’ allowance as part of any bet, and pretty why if I calculate my own set of prices I work to a 70% book and never bet at odds on.
Rob
I’ve tried your method using £s not ”points”, you frequently put up three runners in a race and still fail to find a winner, it’s nerdy nonsense. I followed your picks for a while but I didn’t open a numbered bank account in Switzerland. I would go mental if I had to bet against myself day after day which is what your method amounts to. Only a deranged anorak would entertain such a convoluted method.
Woolf
There’s no call to belittle others just because their methods don’t suit you. GT seems knowledgeable and successful enough to me. All he does is play the percentages, just as bookmakers do every day. Bookmakers presumably manage to do it successfully on a regular, testified by their continued presence, so why on earth shoudln’t a deidcated punter be able to do the same thing?
For various reasons I’ve not been betting much in the past year or two, but my most successful periods have been betting in a similar way to GingerTipster. Of course backing three in a race doesn’t guarantee a winner, and if you think otherwise you are naive in the extreme. If you right horses however, and get on at the right odds, it does give you a chance of coming out on the right side.
Far from being convoluted I suspect his method is essentially fairly straightforward. They may take time, but that doesn’t make them convoluted.
I’m probably p***ing in the wind here, but we ‘deranged anoraks’ jhave to stick together. If ever you are at Kelso let me know and you can come up and meet the ‘Top Of The Roof Deranged Anoraks Club’ enjoying our racing on a regular basis.
Rob
My idea of a good tipster is one who is able to nail a winner and not one who introduces an ”if not him, then possibly another” factor.
Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.