Yalwen

You post some amazing stats Mc. Thanks for that. I find them all fascinating and wish I had access to a database such as yours. As a matter of interest, which forecast do you use to gather the favourite information? I’m also following your Cheltenham stats with great interest. Thank you for all the information and for all the hard work that you put in. I hope it yields some good profits for you.

Those were the days. Smoky atmosphere, exciting commentaries, days before tax and the infernal machines. A mix of ‘interesting’ characters, Sporting Chronicle, ‘real’ Sporting Life on the walls for us to read. Happy days, indeed. Gone forever. Nostalgia ain’t what it used to be, for sure.

Brilliant Ebor, Brig. Fantastic insight and a terrific profit. Thanks for your hard work and well done! Whatever the outcomes you always give us an interesting read and I always look forward to your analysis.

‘i will be stunned if Alpinista gets beat in this’. Superb analysis and your confidence assured my bet. I hope you got the 9/4. Thanks and well done Zilzalian. Yalwen

£1.30 for Saturday edition. £1.90 for Sunday’s paper. The rule of diminishing returns. The end is nigh for paper editions of newspapers, sadly. I don’t wonder at those prices. Most of the information that we used to rely on is now available on line for free.

‘I think your meticulous record keeping is a excellent example for many on this site’. I could not agree more. Keep going, ralphie and thanks for all the hard work. It is appreciated.

Thank you both so much. Greatly appreciated, and the Dunces cap has now been removed from my head. It’s how we learn.

This is an interesting and fascinating post. I have been using the RaceAdvisor site for some time and believe that when combined with At The Races it’s the best free online information there is. I am puzzled, though. You obviously do extensive research and I try to do that too, what with spreadsheets and other daily betting chores but I am wondering how you calculate the ‘price differential’ to such precision as 267%. Would you be prepared to show us how as I don’t think I have come across it before. Anyway, MCCLARKE good luck with your odds on venture and thanks for your post which I always find balanced and interesting. Yalwen

Ha, ha! You’re a very funny person. You make me smile, anyway. Good luck with your selections. May they all be winners.

If you're sharp enough the value can be had with the bookmakers. The trouble then is with keeping your Accounts. These guys are constantly looking for anyone who may be a shrewd backer and if you take the value you'll soon be banned. Their sophisticated software flags up winners and even losers who constantly take value. Look at the profits made by the leading bookmakers - that tells its own story. They only want and encourage losers. Unfortunately they have made it impossible for clever backers to hold on to regular accounts so, it's obvious, the exchanges, who only want your commission, is the way we are all being forced to go.

Harry, Clive Holt's staking plan is extremely logical. I've used it for years and the sense is apparent.

I've been involved in gambling, on and off course, for even longer than McLarke and I would wholeheartedly agree with him. The problem that the originator is facing is not his profit - he is already making a level stake profit of +16 points, which is good - it is his expectations. His strike rate is ok, but could be better and he needs to focus on the number of losers that he backs. and the stakes that they carry. If he can do that, and I can, then he will see that level stakes or considered stakes is the only way to go. Money management is crucial and you only get grey hairs and problems with most, probably all, forms of staking plans especially those that depend on any form of retrieval. Of course, it goes without saying, that a solid and realistic bank roll is required and your betting pattern should never put the bank under severe pressure.

I couldn’t agree more with your views Quartu. Watching any of the sports presenters on any of the TV programmes is like being addressed by unqualified Social working geography teachers. Comparisons with these people and the real ‘experts’ of recent years is impossible. The great voices and knowledge of people such as O’Sullivan, Francome, Lord Oaksey, McCririck were voices of wisdom, information and authority. Todays so called ‘presenters’ comprise box-tickers and loud mouthed buffoons with, of course, the important inclusivity agenda regardless of the ability of those ‘included’. I’ve taken to recording the races, fast forwarding through the drivel and, apart from the actual commentary, the mute button is pressed.

I'll do that VT, but I used to enjoy sitting down with a coffee and a pen and going through the runners and riders, marking the paper and making notes before I made a selection. Can't do that on T'internet. Plus, of course, at his peak Nigel Taylor was the very best. Some of his ratings, especially in the lower grade non handicaps were almost a licence to print money. So, this is what we call progress, I suppose.

That's a terrific post, Harry. I don't think that you are asking for anything that is too onerous and it would certainly show much greater clarity. Let's hope that the response is positive.