frames

A long time ago (decades, probably) there was a vogue amongst gamblers for being dismissive of 'systems' and then saying that what they did was to use 'methods' for selection. In the end I suppose you pay your money and make your choice, but the difference between the teeth of that fine comb of definition escaped me then, and still does. Each gambler has their own likes and dislikes - and their taboos. My personal taboo is never to back each way - it only takes a moment to calculate that the 1/5 offered on a 33/1 shot that finishes 2nd or 3rd is not 6.6/1, but 3.3/1 - and you are still trying to find a 33/1 shot to place. One of the 'methods' that was popular for a while at least used current form as a basis - look for horses that put up improved speed figures in a better race LTO - 'better' was defined by value of race e.g improved figure in 30k race LTO, now running in 20k race. It was a starting point, and was useful. It had some success then, and is probably a good yardstick still. At the time it was known as the Van Der Wheil method - apparently named after a gambler.

Personally I think the takeout in pool betting is so high that it's almost impossible to win The percentage takeouts vary, so it's a matter of opinion, I suppose. I think it also depends on how you calculate field book percentages - which are fixed.

I'm new here so maybe I'm going over old ground, so apologies if that's the case. I do think all the ideas expressed have value but for quite some time now I've stopped doing things like compiling a list of horses to watch - experience has taught me that all you end up with a list of horses that have been beaten, and that's not a good start to selection. I think the real money is in pool betting, so I have concentrated on that,

Hi, I'm new here - name is Dave. I've been backing horses and dogs since, well, let's say far too long.