[billion]

G’day Lance,

Have just found this thread and cannot understand why there has not been any postings for almost two months.

I certainly agree with your ideas and comments and would like to expand upon them if I can.

Time is against me this afternoon but I just wanted to bring the idea back to the fore prior to injecting some additional thoughts.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

G’day Artemis.

I am a little confused by your posting which says Best Odds are not available on BF’s or perhaps I have not understood because if a bookmaker is making such an offer it must be to ALL horses in the race and so far I have not had a problem but then again at my small stakes I don’t anticipate any.

I look forward to your clarification.

I have my fingers crossed for today’s selection, Silly Gilly running in the 5.00 Beverley , nice early price 11/2, best odds guaranteed.(Tafool was also selected but is a non runner).

Interest only: –

Massey top 3 rated which are BF’s.

Folkestone 3.50

Aaman

3rd in ratings
Folkestone 4.20 Tafool 1st but a non runner

Beverley 3.00

Doorback

3rd in ratings
Beverley 4.30

Amethyst Dawn

1st in ratings
Beverley 5.00

Silly Gilly

2nd in ratings

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Thanks for your response again Dave Jay.

Can you tell from past info how a BF performs in it;s next/current race should it be favourite again.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Well, well, well, Guys, thanks for all the input and it will take a little time to digest the data from yourself Dave Jay.

My comment regarding early prices comes from the fact that I like to make my bets and then get on with what remains to be done during my day. However with

Best Odds Guaranteed

it makes a big difference as far as I am concerned. Bookmakers and layers on the exchanges can and do make errors of judgement, a quick look at Odds Checker ensures I am able to take the best prices available and there are sometimes significant margins to exploit but if I have got it wrong and the price drifts I still do not lose out.

Sometimes it is frustrating when the best available price is with an office not offering

Best Odds

and it is then down to chance or you pay the money and take the choice, as they say.

The advice I keep hearing time and time again is if we are to win at this game ( and it is a very big IF) is that small margins can make a big difference over a period of time which bring me back to obtaining an edge and prices can be an edge.

I am not a clever cloggs and far from being a Know it All but years of losing is a hard apprenticeship to serve but again throughout the journey we all pick up little bits of knowledge which help us fit them into our own style and in my case a little winning (when it comes along) enhances my hobby of small time punting.

I can only find one BF within my filter but again at a nice early price of 11/2

Hamilton 3.40 Shadowtime

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

G’day Guys, thanks for your interest.

Let me start by saying I always search out systems with two main objects.
1) Its is simple to understand and operate
2) It must cross over from flat racing to the jumps without any rule alteration.

Yes Artimis I agree any current race can have no bearing whatsoever to the previous when our horse was "THE" favourite.However despite what others may think I have the utmost respect for the trainers and am willing to take the leap of faith which is required if building a system around a BF and his judgement. Many things can and do go wrong including errors made by the trainer but nothing can detract from the fact that the horse was thought good enough to win the race but did not. I ask, does that make the horse a bad one? Was it stable money? If so perhaps there are even more reasons to get it back, or was it public opinion/money?

I think there are many reasons to consider BF as a huge starting point to build a system.

Although the figures promoted by Dolus carry enough weight to forget the whole idea and go back to the drawing board I trust those figures are for every BF which has ever run in a race without any filtration so on closer examination they are not as bad as first thought, roughly one in six finds a winner which is not a strike rate to be sneared at and can only be improved with a little tinkering.

So it comes down to a filter or two because there are far too many runners for me to cope with anyway.

I don’t know if you agree with me but the more filters added only brings the prices down and then makes the system much about the same as hundreds of other selection methods and detracts from any edge you may have and all that you end up with is perhaps just another failed approach.

I have chosen just one filter which in time may well get changed but I doubt if it will get added to and so the possibilities are endless. Massey’s ratings has been mentioned so why not look for any top rated or second or even top three rated which is a BF, it sounds as good as any.

Another suggestion could be to start with the Naps Table and working downwards (or even upwards) making your selection the first one you come to which carries the BF tag.

My selections today ALL lost (although two were placed) but the early prices when I checked were 7/2, 6/1 & 8/1, if but’s and maybe’s but the prices indicate I could have an edge and that is what I think is needed when seaking out a new system.

Sadly, so far, nobody has come forward with any experience of a system with BF as its main ingredient but I will remain pleased to hear of any such working method.

It would be interesting to read any other ideas which can be used as a single filter, all of which can be experimented with such as top jockey’s or best track trainer’s there must be a myriad of ideas that can be brought to the table, it only takes one.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

What a shame.

That said it does offer some understanding of how rules can replace common sense, which in turn gives rise to further understanding of just how such dogma can easily result in wars being started, when only pride and ego need to be put to one side in favour of an easy resolve thus avoiding an entrenchment from which there is no solution.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Hi Matron,

Would you therefore please send him my email address?

I guess there are and have to be rules but if you do this for me i will be very grateful indeed.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

No need to divulge it MATRON, just do it.

======================================================

4 LTO, is this place or not?

8.40 Newton Abbot tomorrow says not. TOP TREES 4LTO but the race in question had 11 runners and therefore not a place.

Had it had 16 runners then it would have been I guess.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Until there is a definitive answer from MR4TUNE we are floundering. I prefer CD as per distance achieved at the course of the race being scrutinised.

For me this reduced the high number of races each day but I do risk missing winners.

Today with only 3 selections there was a 20/1 3rd which overall incurred a loss.

Is there anyone who has access to his email address which was provided when registering? If so can he not be contacted ! ! !

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

‘gooday Dolus,

I have edited the offending post.

Have been to SL site and am not sure where/what is Address bar, it is a swine being old but sadly can’t do much about it.

Regarding the rules, my reading is such: –

A qualifying selection must be the only horse in the race with CD in the form line [not C & D] and been unplaced LTO. There maybe other CD’s but if 1.2.3 poss 4 LTO they are simply deleted leaving a qualifier with anything but 1.2.3.[4].

Clear as mud eh!

Is there not anyone able to contact MR4TUNE?

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

g’day guy’s,

To answer your question first Arkle, I use the Sporting Life racecards [on line].

I normally read Sun for the sport and just maybe Page 3 to rekindle old memories of when I was young.

I digress.

I do think an error has been made on my behalf and without recourse to the race card I am unable to explain. I had entered Le Forezien into the machine but on checking . . . . . . well who knows and admit to the errror, Was the Light Entertainer either above or below on the card as I may have ticked or underlined it by mistake.

A huge chunk of humble pie has been eaten, you can be assured of that.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Come on MR4TUNE please get in touch and answer some of the questions.

The system is proving to be a winner ! ! !

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Hi Arkle

CD is race over the same distance & course combined

C & D are seperate races. Has won at the course but the distance has been won elsewhere.

That is my interpretation and I do wonder if C & D will make any difference.

[b:352lojfj]Previous part of this posting has been deleted because of a serious error and trust forgivness will be granted by anyone that has been mislead[/b:352lojfj]

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

BEETHOVEN just missed being in the frame.

Still, 3 from 4 for the Royal Ascot Festival is pretty darned good.

Roll on the next festival meeting.

P.S. DANSANT run into a place in the Hardwick for Rob Wright’s selection, so there was still money to be won.

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

MR4TUNE strikes again: –

Golden Jubillee Stakes (Group1)

ART CONNOISSEUR won 20/1

Was

YOU

on?

I bet HE was !

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

No wonder he calls himself Mr4Fortune

I have just checked yesterday’s selections and the winners (excl. places) were 20/1, 14/1 & 11/2

So far I have checked 3 days and it goes something like this: –

31 selections and a return at s.p. = 54 (+23)

Who’s laughing now?

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

The final day of Royal Ascot and Tom Pepper is back with a nap in the first, let’s hope it all ends harmoniously: –

2.30 R. Ascot BEETHOVEN

and I will go each way.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Author]

Posts