maria
-
Posts
81 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by maria
-
-
Re: Does anyone on here make long term profit Oooh I've never looked at the Betfair forum (and not sure I want to really, to be honest!) ... :eek I think that guy was probably one of the ones who's been sending me private messages trying to "buy the system"! (because I've only explained 183 times why it won't be for sale!) ... ;) Good luck with yours today, Pinhofap ... :dude
-
Re: The Tipsters System
Who knows more' date=' Odds compilers or Joe Punter?[/quote'] -
Re: The Tipsters System
It is very nice to lay 3 horses in a 5 horse race and win the bet' date=' didn't think it would happen.[/quote'] Yes indeed; neither did I! :dude You also did well just to miss Macorville (opened 3/1), perhaps, but a very good day's well-deserved results here: I hope it continues just like this ... good luck to all and especially to the thread's creator! ... ;) -
Re: The Tipsters System Hi Pinhofap, Many thanks for your fast reply and very kind comments ... :)
I am laying the horses 1 minute prior to the off' date=' so I suppose it drifted beyond 4.0 before I checked the price.[/quote'] Yes, I completely understand. I had slightly misunderstood something I read earlier on in the other thread, where you mentioned that you leave 4.0 unmatched (I envisaged you were leaving 4.0 unmatched earlier than you are, probably). Apologies. Of course, with hyped, tipped, promoted shorties like these you will be doing the right thing just going in 1 minute before the off most of the time. Makes complete sense. Again, best wishes and good luck: I have high hopes for this! ;) -
Re: The Tipsters System Hi Pinhofap, My very best wishes to you for this thread, one of the most enterprising, well-reasoned and interesting things I've seen started off for a very long time. Just a small question: why was Formal Decree in the 4.10 at Beverley a "no bet" for you today, instead of winning a point? Although the SP was 10/3, it actually opened at 5/2, so surely 4.0 (left unmatched) would have been matched? (I had actually laid it myself earlier on, coincidentally, at 3.75). Good luck! ... :dude
-
Re: Lay the Tipsters
Indeed. Because commission is settled on a "per event basis". I think this may be the point that traf hasn't quite taken into account, hence your mutual misunderstanding here, guys. I aim not to criticise anyone, naturally, but to promote "penny-dropping" because I have seen this very misunderstanding underlie countless other differences of opinion (particularly in a laying thread I've been compiling for a year now, in which it's surprised me many, many times how often even experienced users of the exchanges - and the exchanges are all the same in this regard - don't quite appreciate from what figures the commissions are deducted!). Hope this helps ... :)By laying a price that is smaller than the one you backed you make a profit no matter what the outcome of the race is. -
Re: A/W. system based selections Not at all, Ralphie; not at all ... your threads here remain a pleasure (and a profitable one) to read! ... :dude
-
Re: A/W. system based selections I think that's a turf race, Ralphie ... looks like only the first two on the Lingfield card are on the AW ... ;)
-
Re: Lay the Tipsters
you'd think 6 or 7 tipsters touting a horse would be a good bet (not neccessarily value)' date=' whatever the price.[/quote'] We must agree to differ, I'm afraid: personally I would think the opposite. But for me, value is the sole indicator of the "goodness" or "badness" of a bet. Good luck! ... :eek -
Re: Lay the Tipsters
I don't know the first thing about form or horses' date=' never been to a race before, but I do think that this psychological aspect of the average punter backing the tipped horses will drive the market down and give value to a laying strategy. I also have another theory about fixed races, but that is a bit "conspiracy theory" and I don't think it much that makes sense so I won't say it. But it is strange that horses below evens that are tipped seem to lose more than the others.[/quote'] I think that you and I have perhaps quite a bit in common in our ideas. I talk elsewhere even about the "conspiracy theory" aspects of this and I find that nobody takes any notice of me anyway (which isn't such a bad thing, and eventually I will perhaps learn to do as you do, and say less!). But I think they are issues that won't go away, and over the next few years we will gradually hear more and more about it anyway. Meanwhile, I wish you very well with your thread here, I have a good feeling about it and am watching with interest and thinking about its possible application to one of my own systems. Bonne chance! ... :dude -
Re: Lay the Tipsters
I looked at this system of staking more the more a horse is tipped' date=' and it didn't seem logical to me as I would have thought that the more a horse was tipped the 'stronger' it would be to win a race. After all if a horse was tipped by 6 or 7 tipsters you would think "well they all can't be wrong".[/quote'] Please excuse my chipping in here, Thunderfoot, but I think you might be assuming (as many people do) a correlation between a horse's probability of winning a race and the overall profit-expectation of backing it. People who lay for a living will tell you that the opposite is often so. The "concealed point" is that as the horse's winning chances increase, the value in backing it decreases exponentially. And what determines this is partly the number of tipsters who have tipped it. To try a numerate example: you are making the point that a horse with a 60% chance of winning is a better bet (for backing) than a horse with only a 40% chance of winning. The reality, in my opinion, is the opposite. The horse with the 40% chance of winning will be available at a far better price which will lose less money in the long run. The one with the 60% chance of winning will be priced like one with an 80% chance should be, and the true value is in laying it. This is all connected with why it's virtually impossible to make a living out of backing favourites, and high strike-rate systems have a much lower POI than low strike-rate systems. What underlies the idea on which this thread is based is that the very thing that makes the backing value so poor is the horse being over-touted by tipsters, and the fact that the public (or the majority of the losing punters, anyway) allow themselves to be influenced by these tipsters, with the result that the value collapses, thus making laying them long-term the profitable course. It's not about price. It's about value. Logic (and experience) suggest that the more tipsters have promoted them, the better the laying value is ... ;) -
Re: having the worse day ever
i have lost nearly every race
Not so much a tip as an observation here, Mark: the greater the number of races you bet in, the harder it is to come out with a profit. I think that if you're playing "nearly every race", it really won't be possible in the long term to make a profit at all. Even people with a lifelong background in racing can't manage that. Personal opinion only, of course, and I wish you better luck!i was wondering if anyone had any tips to help me -
Re: Quick System 3.25 on the exchange is actually 2.25/1, Pirata. But I think the forecast prices that Ralphie kindly puts up with his system selections are just the Racing Post forecasts from the night before. This doesn't change the fact that these are excellent tips and well worth following. Good luck!
-
Re: Your thoughts please on this! Interesting that the horses drawn 1, 2 and 3 were all withdrawn in a 5f race at Beverley yesterday. Coincidence of course. No trainer would take a horse out of the race just because he didn't like the draw ... :eyes
-
Re: price of 'place' VS price of winning the racing An additional, complicating factor to take into account in all of this is that "connections" will sometimes have win bets and place lays, and you don't have to be terribly suspicious or cynical to envisage that some jockeys have been known to be told this by some trainers who would therefore greatly appreciate their horse coming either 1st or 4th if that's not too inconvenient. Under such circumstances (and you can gradually learn some of the jockey/trainer combinations to watch out for in this regard) these people have almost a "guaranteed win bet". The tell-tale signs of this are huge amounts very suddenly appearing as "lumps" available to back on the place market on the exchange, where such behaviour can sometimes far more easily be concealed than on the win market there. If a horse suddenly appears to be "far too easy" to lay at a surprisingly good price, apparently out of all proportion to its concurrent win odds, that can sometimes be a very good reason for not touching it. Mentioning no names, of course ... :@
-
Re: Laying Odds On Shots Wishing you very good luck with this, Rooster, and watching with great interest ... :ok My own guess (and I hope it's wrong, which they often are!) is that this system will be profitable in May/June and maybe in November/December but maybe not so hot at other times of the year ... :eek I don't quite understand how you gain, overall, by increasing your liability after losing a lay? You're obviously not suggesting that the outcome of the previous event alters the probability of the next event, but equally clearly you'll be increasing the short-term risk in a losing run ... if your system makes a level stake (i.e. level liability, with laying) profit, you don't need to do this anyway to be able to retire on it - just gradually building up the stakes as the bank grows will be more than adequate; but if it doesn't, you're surely increasing the risk of an eventual wipe-out by varying the liability according to the outcome of the previous event ... :\
-
Re: NO RISK Horse Betting System It will presumably be some sort of loss recovery plan, if it guarantees to win every day. That in itself, if so, is good enough reason to keep away. These plans can typically make their £50 or so per day every day for the first 40 or 60 or 80 or 100 days (but often with an intra-day drawdown of about £10,000) and then on the 41st or 61st or 81st or 101st day you suddenly find yourself eventually, after a losing run during the day, staking £50,000 to recover losses and win £100, or something as crazy as this. You can't get your bet on, of course. And getting a guarantee payment of £1000 from the system seller doesn't help much either (if you can find him). It isn't possible to win every day, and trying to do so is a grave mistake. There's no substitute for hard work and gradual learning. Short cuts lead to poverty, not success. All "in my opinion", of course ... :tongue2
-
Re: Greyhound placers and selections You might never know, guys: I'd imagine that after a welcome as warm as that, Macca quite possibly won't be troubling you with another post, anyway ... :eek
-
Re: Information For All Weather racing, try this one:- http://www.btinternet.com/~howard.hutch/AW/AWstf.htm
-
Re: Massey's Placepots Hello % Man, Just wanted to say that I'm really extremely grateful to you. And very happy that your wife has recovered, which is the most important thing of all and rather puts all the rest of the conversation into its proper perspective as a non-entity!! I feel so embarrassed now that what I imagined was a simple, straightforward and obvious request caused all this consternation!! Naturally I tried to contact you by other means first, rather than posting in your thread; but I'm afraid I had no other option because of the rules of this place. Hope you'll understand and forgive me. And of course if the moderators want to delete any of my posts, that would be fine with me ... whatever. I hope you appreciate that there was absolutely no "slagging off" here from me, and that if I could have sent you a private message, I would have done, as I explained in my very first post. Again, thank you indeed for your help, very best wishes with your placepots and the other thread, and kindest regards,
-
Re: Massey's Placepots
Then why are you doing so, Simon? You misquoted my own email back to me, and now you have also misquoted me on the board here. This conversation is a different matter from what you and I discussed. Please allow The % Man to reply to my question. I'm a member of this forum just as you are. I'm asking someone a perfectly reasonable and perfectly amicable question here, and I resent your attempt to imply otherwise.I dont want to drag things up again between you and me -
Re: Massey's Placepots
That's putting it a little bit mildly, Datapunter. But in any case what you're saying has nothing at all to do with my simple, straightforward request to the compiler of this fine thread that he should simply not use here any selections based on what Adrian Massey obviously considers private, password-protected information, because to do so undermines his charity work. It really is as simple as that.Obviously this is just one persons experiance and maybe i got a few details wrong
Again, you're putting it rather mildly. But again, it's not really relevant to what I'm asking, which is simply that the compiler of this fine thread should not use here any selections based on what Adrian Massey obviously considers private, password-protected information, because to do so undermines his charity work. Why is this such a big issue? Adrian gives away most of his ratings free of charge on a public website. Can't we just respect his decision to keep one or two of the ratings private if he wants to? Especially given his reason for doing so?maybe the forum is now different than it was a year ago
Who said anything about copyright?! You're surely not suggesting that it's right, decent, proper, kind or however else you want to put it that information from someone's private, password-protected ratings should be given away in another forum, are you? And especially not, given the charity connection and purpose? That's all I'm asking! And actually I wasn't asking you anyway, I was asking The % Man, who has yet to reply! :eekuntil there is a significant change to the copyright message on the site i see nothing wrong with what people post here on Punters Lounge. -
Re: Massey's Placepots
The thing is' date=' revealing a selection or 2 for each race is hardly giving out an entire set of ratings for the meeting, is it?[/quote'] Nobody said it was. But it's telling everyone which are the top-rated ones at that meeting that he's chosen NOT to put on his public website but to make password-protected!! If that isn't giving away confidential information, I don't know what is?! You can't get much more clear-cut than this, surely?? What's the point of it being password-protected if someone's going to post it another forum?? This is just undermining his charity fundraising, plain and simple, isn't it? Sorry, FF, you're entitled to your "rant" as you call it. And I'm entitled to comment that I simply couldn't disagree with you more. I'd also venture to suggest that if you asked 100 "innocent bystanders", not just 99 of them but all 100 would agree with me. You surely can't seriously doubt that? I'm not sure, really, what your rant is about, but if you don't like the way Adrian Massey raises funds for a children's hospice, I think you probably ought to address your comments to him directly, don't you? His email address is given on his website. All I'm trying to do here is to invite someone to stop making it harder to raise money for the charity by giving away in public information which is password-protected and reserved for people's private use. Adrian very generously puts the majority of his ratings on a public website. Don't you think people should respect the little bit of information that he reserves privately for people who choose to support his charity? Is that really asking too much?? -
Re: Massey's Placepots Thank you, Mat - understood. That seems to give me an incentive to make 20-something short, silly, gratuitous posts just to get up there; but I wouldn't want to inflict that on anyone, so I'll just wait patiently instead. ;)
5 horse flat races..
in At The Races - Racing Forum
Posted
Re: 5 horse flat races..