- This topic has 175 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Connections have racing pretty much sewn up to the exclusion of all others, they have their own networks and foolproof means of keeping info to themselves. The exchanges allow them to cover costs for transporting horses to courses where they will not be trying. This is not conjecture, racing is all about disguise and subterfuge.
Laughably ridiculous.
Mike
Connections have racing pretty much sewn up to the exclusion of all others, they have their own networks and foolproof means of keeping info to themselves.
Woolf
Connections are at the mercy of the racing programme and have to take their chances as they come along. Having been involved in a msall way in ownership in the past couple of years we have to run a horse at the best opportunities and when we are able. If they ran 4 mile races at Hexham every four weeks then Outlaw Tom would have been cleaning up, but sadly life ain’t like that. I’m putting in disposable money and get a lot of fun out it, even if my appearances on course as ‘owner’ have just to see me in the winner’s enclosure!
There are varying demands as to where horse are run and on many occasions it’s pretty obvious that ‘he who pays the piper calls the tune’. A horse runs in a particular because it’s near to the owners home and they want to see it run. There are plenty of occasions when I see that a horse is running under the wrong conditions but it’s reasonably clear why. On many occasions I think I’ve clocked a horse’s preferences a lot better than the trainer and it’s just a question of being patient and waiting for the opportunity.
You could try selecting a few horses at random and planning out a programme for them. I’ve done it myself just as an academic exercise and it teaches me a lot.
The other thing is to get out on course and just watch horses from pre-parade ring all the way through the process to the unsaddling. Watch horses’ behaviour and ponder on its effect on the outcome of races.
Alternatively of course you could sit in your armchair spouting your ‘wisdom’ about how those involved have the whole sport stitched up and nobody can do anything about it. Any why? Because it’s oh so much easier to sit on your backside than to apply your brain to a problem and come up with a solution. Ginger does it, and proves it with his performance on this Forum and the tipping competition.
I’m wasting my time of course. Let’s face it, it’s too much effort to get out and learn things and get a step ahead…
Rob
If
"racing is all about disguise and subterfuge"
, then how come I make a damn good profit without any "inside information"; ie from just studying form? Those same form books that you apparently study.
Ginge,I think everyone knows how you make your profit by now…..
YOU BACK EVERY BLOODY HORSE IN THE RACE
.Your Mathematical style of betting works well for you and long may it continue,its very cold and calculated and I sense you have to distance yourself from getting too attached to certain horses.The only similarity between my way and yours is I also try to cover certain bets by backing e/w, that way I know I’m playing for 3 places and because my Ante-Post bets are generally at odds that allow a decent profit margin for a place I have the safety of covering my win stakes should they all lose,which inevitably they all do!!
No, I don’t "back every horse in the race" Gord, as you well know I back selected horses I believe are value. But that discussion should be for another thread.
Gord, my response to
this
thread is just about punters making profit from
studying form
. They (ie my and other punter’s
over all
profit)
PROOVE
Prof and Woolf’s points
WRONG
.
Of course punters can make profit in a different way to me, but apart from one or two with "inside information" – they do it (like me AND YOU) through studying form… Your ante-post profit Gord… comes
not
from inside information, but from
looking at races and studying form
. Which is my
point entirely
.
Value Is EverythingI’ll relate a tale which may illustrate my point.
A friend of mine was recieiving tips from a paid tipster and was doing OK with a steady stream of winners. One friday evening he took a call from the tipster and was given a horse for the following day. He duly made a note of it before checking the markets on the Saturday morning. He received another call on the saturday from the tipster who told him the original tipped horse would not now be winning because the owners would now be backing another horse in the race.
This demonstrates what we’re up against, in house networking designed to keep the public firmly out of the loop.
I’ll relate a tale which may illustrate my point.
A friend of mine was recieiving tips from a paid tipster and was doing OK with a steady stream of winners. One friday evening he took a call from the tipster and was given a horse for the following day. He duly made a note of it before checking the markets on the Saturday morning. He received another call on the saturday from the tipster who told him the original tipped horse would not now be winning because the owners would now be backing another horse in the race.
This demonstrates what we’re up against, in house networking designed to keep the public firmly out of the loop.
No, it demonstrates that your *ahem* ‘friend’ should stop consorting with nutters.
Mike
I’ll relate a tale which may illustrate my point.
A friend of mine was recieiving tips from a paid tipster and was doing OK with a steady stream of winners. One friday evening he took a call from the tipster and was given a horse for the following day. He duly made a note of it before checking the markets on the Saturday morning. He received another call on the saturday from the tipster who told him the original tipped horse would not now be winning because the owners would now be backing another horse in the race.
This demonstrates what we’re up against, in house networking designed to keep the public firmly out of the loop.
No, it demonstrates that your *ahem* ‘friend’ should stop consorting with nutters.
Mike
What do you mean by ”consorting with nutters ”?
Woolf,
Just because someone calls himself a "tipster" does not mean he’s any good. Anyone could look up the form of a race, find a horse who will be unlikely to be suited by conditions, tell the mug "it will win", then later say "it won’t win because the owners are backing another horse"… Knowing full well people will be taken in, thinking he must know his stuff. They know that after plying the mug with a story like that – they aremore
likely to come back to him than if he’d given a proper tip in the first phone call.
Bloke phoned me up and wanted to give me a free tip. When I asked what price should I take? He said "any price, it will win".
He got the "percentages lecture" and didn’t phone again! Value Is EverythingI’ll relate a tale which may illustrate my point.
A friend of mine was recieiving tips from a paid tipster and was doing OK with a steady stream of winners. One friday evening he took a call from the tipster and was given a horse for the following day. He duly made a note of it before checking the markets on the Saturday morning. He received another call on the saturday from the tipster who told him the original tipped horse would not now be winning because the owners would now be backing another horse in the race.
This demonstrates what we’re up against, in house networking designed to keep the public firmly out of the loop.
Name of the tipster? Surely if he is doing it for a living there’s no harm in naming him.
The horses involved? If the horses are tips in the public domain from supposed ‘paid tipster’ then there’s no problem naming names?
It demonstrates nothing at all other than the possibility of concocting a vague story to suit your purposes. Aside from that, even if it is true, it’s one horse amongst hundreds running on the day!
Rob
Even some people within racing, stable lads, owners, trainers and ex-jockeys want you to believe in stories of skulduggery. Some will be true, others… Bare in mind by telling you these things… They know you will be more inclined to listen to/believe in what they have to say about horses running today or tomorrow.
Punters don’t want to listen to an insider if all he/she says is "every horse is running on its merits". Therefore it is in their interests to come up with a story or two.
Some insiders are of course worth listening to. I heard from a source that the Charlie Hills filly Just The Judge was one of their best two year olds – before she set foot on a racecourse.
Value Is EverythingOh dear, another lovely thread where Prof and Woolf set about blaming everything else other than there own lack of ability for the fact that they are losers at the game.
It’s quite interesting that neither ever offer an explanation as to why there are some people that make the game pay. Neither ever offer an explanation of their own selection process. It is quite clear to me that neither of you understand racing and you clearly don’t understand betting.
Perhaps you could both answer these questions.
1. Why do many people manage to make the game pay without ‘inside information’?
2. What is your selection process ?
Perhaps you could both answer these questions.
1. Why do many people manage to make the game pay without ‘inside information’?
2. What is your selection process ?
1) How many unconnected backers do you know that are making the game pay?
2) I’ve tried every selection process in the book, none can identify winners previously raced with no winning intent.
Perhaps you could both answer these questions.
1. Why do many people manage to make the game pay without ‘inside information’?
2. What is your selection process ?
1) How many unconnected backers do you know that are making the game pay?
2) I’ve tried every selection process in the bookValue Is EverythingHow do you think I can make the game pay then Woolfie?
When only one bet in a thousand (of mine) comes from "inside information".
Value Is EverythingHow do you think I can make the game pay then Woolfie?
When only one bet in a thousand (of mine) comes from "inside information".
You’re well outside the mainstream Ginger. I don’t want to revive old arguments as to the systems you deploy. I can’t be doing with backing multiple runners in a single race.
How do you think I can make the game pay then Woolfie?
When only one bet in a thousand (of mine) comes from "inside information".
You’re well outside the mainstream Ginger. I don’t want to revive old arguments as to the systems you deploy. I can’t be doing with backing multiple runners in a single race.
Then you don’t understand my betting Woolfie.
"Backing multiple runners in a single race" – Is NOT the important issue. It is backing horses which are VALUE. ie
Having a BETTER CHANCE than their PRICE indicates.
That is the ONE AND ONLY essential ingredient to making an over all profit.
Fact is anyone who backs "multiple runners" WITHOUT getting VALUE will just end up LOSING MORE than he/she would by backing JUST ONE horse in a race.
Therefore, whether a punter likes betting ONE horse or MULTIPLE horses in a race – he/she CAN make an over all profit IF they get VALUE.
I could just back solely the VERY BEST value horse in each race. But I PERSONALLY find my confidence goes without a regular supply of winners. Obviously the more selections in a race the more winners I have. Therefore it keeps my confidence high. Confidence is important because it keeps the way I look at a race the same. Without it I may select the wrong horse/s as VALUE bets… and so NO LONGER show an over all profit.
Anyone without confidence issues could easily back SOLELY the horse with the VERY BEST chance in a race. Indeed, I wish I could concentrate more on the VERY BEST value, because then I’d make even more PROFIT!
Value Is EverythingI’ve made more this All Weather season than I have over the last 7 years on the Turf season.
You have to know when to play & how to play, the answer’s are not entirely written down all though about 68-78% are the rest is based on intuition & braveness, that’s what sets the likes of Professortrubshawe, GingerTipster, Darren823, Betlarges off this world from the likes of me, TAPK, Tom Segal, Hugh Taylor etc.
How do you think I can make the game pay then Woolfie?
When only one bet in a thousand (of mine) comes from "inside information".
You’re well outside the mainstream Ginger. I don’t want to revive old arguments as to the systems you deploy. I can’t be doing with backing multiple runners in a single race.
Then you don’t understand my betting Woolfie.
"Backing multiple runners in a single race" – Is NOT the important issue. It is backing horses which are VALUE. ie
Having a BETTER CHANCE than their PRICE indicates.
That is the ONE AND ONLY essential ingredient to making an over all profit.
Fact is anyone who backs "multiple runners" WITHOUT getting VALUE will just end up LOSING MORE than he/she would by backing JUST ONE horse in a race.
Therefore, whether a punter likes betting ONE horse or MULTIPLE horses in a race – he/she CAN make an over all profit IF they get VALUE.
I could just back solely the VERY BEST value horse in each race. But I PERSONALLY find my confidence goes without a regular supply of winners. Obviously the more selections in a race the more winners I have. Therefore it keeps my confidence high. Confidence is important because it keeps the way I look at a race the same. Without it I may select the wrong horse/s as VALUE bets… and so NO LONGER show an over all profit.
Anyone without confidence issues could easily back SOLELY the horse with the VERY BEST chance in a race. Indeed, I wish I could concentrate more on the VERY BEST value, because then I’d make even more PROFIT!
Not that old worn out Chestnut again Ginge……..Value! You must have mentioned it half a dozen times in the above post and yet your so called Value goes straight out the window when you add up all your bets in the same race.You can pick a 20/1 winner like I can but when I add up my losers on the race it may well have only paid a paltry 2/1,you do the same and preach Value.There’s No Value in multiple bets Ffs,you are killing what was Value at 20/1 so shut the **** up rantin on about ****** Value Ffs!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.