The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

Peter Stavers Book

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2679
    Cav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4811

    Just finished reading this, some good ideas but a bit vague at times

    His LPF formula which seems to be a lynchpin of his method makes no allowances for fields of less than 6 runners, Also no allowance is made for non handicaps where fields finish strung out further or different track configurations  that make demands on stamina that naturally effect the finishing distances.  He explains away big fields by allowing more horses within LPF "8 or nine depending" again with no definition of a large field.  

    All too generalised and convenient.

    Would be interested in any comments from anybody who’s read the book.

    #71728
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 17718

    <br> Does he actually pay you guys for this crap?

    #71729
    davidbrady
    Member
    • Total Posts 3901

    Quote: from Cavelino Rampante on 3:12 pm on April 30, 2006[br]All too generalised and convenient.

    reet-hard, surely this comment alone shows that the poster is hardly "plugging" the book.

    #71730
    carvillshill
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2778

    Is it a coincidence that his name seems to be a crude translation of "cavalier ramping"

    #71731
    rory
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2685

    Quote: from carvillshill on 1:10 am on May 1, 2006[br]Is it a coincidence that his name seems to be a crude translation of "cavalier ramping"

    erm…..yes.

    <br>It’s more a crude translation of "pony rampant" as in the Ferrari crest.

    #71732
    wit
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2155

    i thought he was either keen on airfix models

    http://www.cavallinorampante.net/

    or from the (unfortunately url-d) napoli tourist board

    http://www.crapnapoli.it/

    best regards

    wit<br>

    #71733
    stevedvg
    Member
    • Total Posts 1137

    http://www.crapnapoli.it/

    I’ve never been to Napoli, but I’ve been to Genoa and<br>www.crapgenova.it would be a perfect URL for that dump!

    Steve

    #71734
    robert99
    Participant
    • Total Posts 897

    Quote: from Cavelino Rampante on 3:12 pm on April 30, 2006[br]Just finished reading this, some good ideas but a bit vague at times

    His LPF formula which seems to be a lynchpin of his method makes no allowances for fields of less than 6 runners, Also no allowance is made for non handicaps where fields finish strung out further or different track configurations  that make demands on stamina that naturally effect the finishing distances.  He explains away big fields by allowing more horses within LPF "8 or nine depending" again with no definition of a large field.  

    All too generalised and convenient.

    Would be interested in any comments from anybody who’s read the book.<br>

    Racing is like that. There is no simple formula that covers every angle you just have to use your own judgement sometimes. The book gives enough examples for a wide range of courses, race type distances and goings to show that LPF can be an effective empirical guide to arriving at a decision, but is not a set rule. There are also many other ways of doing this selection process to use as a decision check. More to the point, what have you actually applied of the book and how did that turn out?

    #71735
    Cav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4811

    Hi Stav

    Firstly thanks for the reply.  Fishing I wasnt, in fact I found your book thought provoking and I was (am) interested in the thoughts of other forum members who may have read it. The main reason I signed up to this board was to discuss the subject of speed and how it relates to UK horseracing.

    Any good method is generally the development of other peoples ideas as I’m sure yours is and there is certainly no one size fits all solution to the eternal search for winners.

    Cheers

    #71736
    robert99
    Participant
    • Total Posts 897

    Quote: from Cavelino Rampante on 11:01 pm on May 4, 2006[br]Hi Stav

    The main reason I signed up to this board was to discuss the subject of speed and how it relates to UK horseracing.

    Any good method is generally the development of other peoples ideas as I’m sure yours is and there is certainly no one size fits all solution to the eternal search for winners.

    Cheers

    CR,

    So what do you want to discuss on speed, or do you mean time? Why cannot people have original ideas? My methods are certainly original. How do you search for winners?

    #71737
    Gareth Flynn
    Participant
    • Total Posts 583

    I’ve read the book and found it very interesting. I compile my own speed figures so the tips on how to best identify whether the fastest race on a card (as compared to class) was in fact run at a proper pace rather than just being the fastest of a load of slow-run races were very interesting. It’s doesn’t all just boil down to the lengths-per-furlong method; there’s plenty on the kind of comments in running you should be looking for to evaluate the pace and the prevailing biases of a race.

    #71738
    Seagull
    Member
    • Total Posts 1708

    I cant comment on Andew’s Trend Horses but the idea behind it is logical.

    With regards to Trainers4Courses I’m not looking for any particular horse but looking for profitable trainers trends.

    The idea is that whilst some trends may become unprofitable the method does find many big priced winners that have so far made every book (both nat hunt and flat ) a level stake profit at s.p. at the end of each and every season for the past 7 seasons.

    Saying that at present both the nat hunt and flat are showing level stake losses.

    However if any method can find winners at up to 100/1 there is a high expectation to show a level stake profit at the end of the season.<br>Last week for example I recommended following John Dunlops horses in 4 y.o. and older handicaps at Leicester. <br>John Dunlop has been in the game longer than most of us but whilst his  record at his local Goodwood track is modest he has a 38.46% strike rate with 4 y.o. and older handicappers at Leicester. Last week he had a 50/1 second in that type of race with his horse Soufah.

    Whilst overall Linda Perratt I think is not that good a trainer but she has made a level stake profit at her local track which is Ayr for the last 4-6 seasons. A £10.00 bet at s.p over that period shows a return of £886.00.

    Ian Wood has been sending runners to Brighton for 5 seasons and following him blind at that Sussex track shows a ls.p. of 99.25 points. (he had a 2nd just last Sunday at 16/1 at that track). He has had just 17 winners from 131 runners and uses this turf course more than any other.<br>So why does he do well there yet fare poorly at Liecester with just the 1 winner from 50 runners? <br>Or indeed Newbury with not a single winners from 41 runners?

    I dont wish to make this a free advert for my books but it clearly shows the methods I employ. <br>Another advantage is it takes very little time to find these trends and it is easy to operate.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.