Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Your are right. Picking winners can be done anyway you like. It is the betting strategy that is the key.
A friend of mine’s wife uses a pin and does pretty well!
When I retired in 2005, I had more time to spend on my Horse Racing.
Limiting the losses per day is a good rule.
I started like you but bet to profit £10 per race. If I lost, I’d want to win £20, plus loses on the first race, on the next race. It is called a Martindale. In January £2006, I made over £10,000 profit. (‘Why didn’t I do this earlier?’ I thought). In February 2006, I had a run of losers and lost the lot. I didn’t go negative as I keep my betting money away form everything else. I just stopped and had a think.
Now, I just bet 2% of my pot each day on single bets and small multiples. If I have a run of losers, my bets reduce. If my pot increases above a certain point, I cleave off the top and put it in my bank, and I sleep an night!The Lincoln has always been a favourite of mine. It was the first race I assessed and bet on as a student in 1968. I picked Frankincense at 100/8 and had 2 shillings (10p) on it to win. As it was the first of the flat, we used the university computer (IBM 1620) to process all the information on the horses and jockeys we had collected weeks ahead, as our ‘project’. Still at it now!
Thanks for replying! I have the same problem. I don’t get the time to check the forums as often as I should.
I’ll carry on as I am now.
I was looking for some ideas on betting strategies. Picking winning horses is either an art or a science, but choosing a profitable betting strategy is the key.
I bet a percentage of my pot daily. If it goes above a certain point,I cleave off the top and put it in my bank. If I have a run of loosers, my bets reduce gradually and I can sleep at night!So your selection published are just what the program produces. Does a Quadpot Perm show a profit?
I am trying to get some rules together… E/W on > 10/1, cover 1/6th of the field. Don’t include odds < numberofrunners /6 .How did you bet on those selections? Covering all e/w wouldn’t show a profit. Neither would odds < 4/1 bet to win and odds > 4/1 e/w. When you are covering all 4 to win, odds less than 4/1 are pointless.
Mick,
I’ve only been with The Racing Forum a short while and didn’t see your post.
Our software and database has been running for 20 years. You can download it and use it all for free and it will allow you to calculate ratings of horses for future races. http://www.simplesoftware.co.uk/ssr1.htm The database will need updating with the latest results and we charge a small fee for that.
Mick JohnsonWe’ve been sending out results and declarations daily to our Access database and software for over twenty years.
All the information can be exported to Excel or anything else.
Download the full system for free from http://www.simplesoftware.co.uk/ssr1.htm to see if it what you need.
Mick JohnsonOne of my customers spotted that I had a horse in the database that was over 500 years old! It fitted all the other criteria, ‘Older than its offspring’, etc, but, as it hadn’t run before, it didn’t show up in the usual age checks. I normally subtract the foaling date from the racedate and get the age of the horse at the time of the race, but, it hadn’t run in the UK or Ireland in the last 20 years. That shows up horses that with an incorrect foaling date, with negative ages, but didn’t show up horses that are too old.
I ran a query looking for horses older than my default ‘No Foaling Date’ of 01/01/1900 and found another 27. I corrected them and that showed up another 7 related horses’ errors.
Due to adding a few more queries to the software, I’ve managed to automate the correction of most of the errors, as they arrive, including the renaming of older horses (adding an I at the end) and adding the new horses’ details.
It has all worked well, so far!I posted a couple of files with the horse decendents names and the win stats and a message with an e-mail link, but none seem to have gone through. I think RacingForum blocks ‘external’ traffic like Amazon.
If you want the files, you can find me on the web.Ran the query. It produced:_
For all decendants of MIDNIGHT LEGEND without MIDNIGHT in their name Total = £360.77 in 2179 runs. ROI 16.56%
A good profit.
You would need something to scan the declarations for matching horses to tell you what to bet on.I’ve had a quick rummage and my database showed that MIDNIGHT LEGEND sired 255 horses, 189 without MIDNIGHT in their name. There were 5 grandfoals. I thought there should be a lot more.
I’ll need to write something a bit special to produce the performance stats of these horses.
Watch this space!I fed the request for all the favourites’ performance into my program and only one showed a profit in 20 years of data:-
FFOS LAS, Turf, Profit £7.58 in 292 runs, 2.60% ROI.
All the rest showed a loss. I assessed the shortest SP odds in each race.
It doesn’t predict the future but gives a good guide.I fed the colours into my program and it gave :- (£1 win bet)
For all horses having RUBIE in their name, Total = £27.50 in 41 runs. ROI 67.07%
For all horses having RED in their name, Total = -£4910.87 in 21943 runs. ROI -22.38%
For all horses having BLUE in their name, Total = -£3105.71 in 14822 runs. ROI -20.95%
So Rubie seems a good bet! I tried ‘E/W bet if the odds are greater than 4’ but the results were similar.
UK and Ireland races only, 20 years of data.When I first looked at this strategy I was pesimistic but, I have been updating the pegigree information in the database and thought, because there is usually some relationship of the
name of a horse and it`s parents, there might be something in it. I posted something last year.
I`ve added the facility to the program and it can now search for the performance of a horse, with certain key words in its name.
Here are a few results, £1 level win bet:-
GOLD: Total = -£3787.51 in 16807 runs. ROI -22.54%
ROSE: Total = -£3104.09 in 9608 runs. ROI -32.31%
ARGENT: Total = -£181.41 in 773 runs. ROI -23.47%
BAY: Total = -£3473.05 in 14710 runs. ROI -23.61%
PEARL: Total = -£517.80 in 3400 runs. ROI -15.23%
GREY: Total = -£1112.79 in 4664 runs. ROI -23.86%
BLUE: Total = -£3098.71 in 14810 runs. ROI -20.92%
RED: Total = -£4899.87 in 21918 runs. ROI -22.36%
SILVER: Total = -£1829.53 in 7189 runs. ROI -25.45%
COLOUR: Total = -£278.79 in 1338 runs. ROI -20.84%
COLOR: Total = £2.10 in 451 runs. ROI 0.46% (Just thought I`d try that one!)
CLARET: Total = -£2.31 in 338 runs. ROI -0.68%
SCARLET: Total = -£136.86 in 867 runs. ROI -15.79%
BLACK: Total = -£1391.82 in 5381 runs. ROI -25.87%
CREAM: Total = -£34.64 in 505 runs. ROI -6.86%
BURNT CREAM: Total = £1.50 in 34 runs. ROI 4.41%
GREEN: Total = -£1526.62 in 7378 runs. ROI -20.69%
A couple show a profit. I`ll have to look at the declarations and search a few.That’s me!
I wrote my program, under Davey’s direction, in 1994 in DOS and converted to Windows as soon as it arrived. We typed the data in manually in those days. An hour and a half, every day!
When Davey disappeared to Ireland, one of my customers helped find a source for the results and declarations data and have updated it with each version of Windows since.
I had The Solidus book reprinted a few years ago. I contacted the printers in Ipswich. They hadn’t been paid for the plates and the printing and wouldn’t let me have them! I scanned mine and had it printed locally.
All the coefficients in the book are way out of date now but the general method is sound.Apart from sprints, (where the jockey has just got to hang on!) the bulk of the horses jolly along at the same pace, probably set by a couple of horses at the front, until the latter stages of the race. So, I’m going to carry on with my usual speed ratings based on the time of the winner and the distance the others are behind at the finish.
I followed Star Rage(IRE) years ago. It always worth a place bet. I’ve just fed it into my program and it showed a profit every year. It never fell, or was pulled up, just a good reliable horse.
One race in 1997 (I’ve just looked it up), all the other horses wobbled about before the first fence. No-one took the lead. Star Rage was pulled up and the race time was 10 seconds slow on Good going. I though there was something a bit fishy. All that was in the news that one jockey was ‘Our trainer told us not to take the lead.’ They must have all been told the same! Star Rage was never pulled up again either.
Sectional timings won’t help there.