Snoopdog

I don't normaly write postings like this, but I've had a few drinks.
I feel sick:
1. Sick at myself for not putting some proper money on Enable. I expect Harry Findlay loaded-up. BTW his book is out in a couple of weeks. [Memories of 2/5 Istabrak, and Moscow Flyer.] Per Harry: "the bigger the odds-on, the more you put on". Mind, he was twice bankrupt.
2. Sick at Ed C. - so nicey-nicey: "Isn't racing wonderful". Well, yes it's good, but it's 90% about gambling, of which he seems unaware.
3. Ollie Bell and his teeth. I don't know what purpose he serves.
4. Francesca. Far too posh for ITV. Voice doesn't work for me. Bring back Tanya to terrestrial.
5. Hayley (not there today). Learn to pronounce the "t" in words.  In her defence, she does seem to be tipping a few winners - which is something ITV seem to regard as irrelevant, and can say a few words about how a horse should be ridden.
6. The fashion crap.
  Only kudos goes to Matt C for tipping the Enable forecast. Jason, Luke and Johnny Murtagh are also OK.
  Rant over!

As far as the Naps go, our figures read a 6.67% yield from stakes of over £17,000 (12 months)
I am recording them in a sheet but only from March when our Expert tips went from 3 per day to 1 per day.
I have a thread but it needs updating, will do it soon.
The treble has been less successful I have to say, we have had two winning trebles this month only. Many many times we have had 2/3 winners but I suppose thats how it goes with picking multiple selections.
I agree some races are too tricky, personally I wouldn't back in any 2yo races but as Paul says we like to provide tips for all races and some of the biggest priced winners have come from races I wouldn't normally do so it just goes to show.
The AW has been a success and anyone who knows me will tell you I don't like the AW at all.
Thanks for the support

What I don't get is why one of the experts - other trainers, jockeys, paddock watchers, regular racegoers, - didn't recognise a 3yo amongst the two year olds
I mean when you get a huge monster of a 2yo the pundits always say 'it looks like a 3yo' ........ er, so they must be able to tell the difference !
 

As BH says, look at the horses' ratings. Then it's judgement. Apply it to your race form study, eg IMO a Class 4 handicap chase at Cheltenham, Newbury, Aintree counts for a lot more than a class 4 handicap chase at Newton Abbot, Uttoxeter, Worcester. And similar.

Thanks. That will be fixed by tomorrow.  

Forum Tab, near top of page not working properly on Racing (???).
Here goes:
1. Mouse on Forum.
2. Mouse on Racing
There's nothing to the right. I'd expect at least "Nap of the Day" and "At the Races".
If it makes any difference, I'm using Win 7 32 bit + Firefox.
[Just noticed NotD is in competitions, but there would be no harm in including it in Racing as well.]
Thanks.

Understood that for a pot based bet at a big meeting, longshots will make a huge difference; but for a string of 1st, 2nd, 3rd favs, I feel the PO acca will beat.
Same as you, just a best guess!

My old dad (northern shop and greyhound bookie) used to say: "Even when you make a mistake, they still have to win."
If I'd backed at 33/1, I wouldn't be able to resist laying back (at least stake recovery) at 4/1.
Good luck with it.

BH, As you say 9 meetings / 67 races is a lot.
I often hear people say: "this is a trappy contest", to which I reply: "well forget that race".
I feel there's no harm in putting "no selection" next to a "difficult" race.
Keep up the good work. I follow your nap of day a lot !
 

Interesting posts on the staking plans !
good luck with all the paper trials
I've been trying a staking plan for the last few months but I've only been betting on football since about last October with 95% single win bets with the odd double and 'fancy' bet here and there .............so basically I was expecting a pretty good strike rate, up around 50%
Since around mid March I tried the following ...........
 
Started with 100 and had 20 times 5 bets.
At the end of that sequence I had around 141 so then did 20 times 7 
At the end of that I had around 145 so did 20 times 7 again
At the end of that I had 165 so did 20 times 8
That's when the losing run set in and before long I was back down to 105
So I had a reset and started again at 20 times 5 .............that's the sequence I'm currently in
 
I guess it's a common staking plan but I found it stopped me doing stupid bets like 30 quid on Burnley to beat Lincoln at 1/6 .............. ............to be fair that was the shocker which made me think I needed a disciplined staking plan !
I think 20 bets at a level stake is a good number to get you over any reasonable losing runs and by increasing or decreasing your stake at the end of every sequence of 20 bets it stretches out your betting bank
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

@Snoopdog
Sorry mate as i said to Xtc, the data is sorted by Paul, i dont have any control over the spreadsheets.
The Daily Nap is basically 99.9% the same horses I put up i the Monthly Naps comp. Strangely todays is different as i need a bigger priced winner for the comp being the last day, buts that hardly ever happens, once in 4 months or something.
What i'm saying is that all of the totals from the Naps can be found in the final tables for each month.
Results since 2016

 

Actually, I have had a few ideas along similar lines, but with a "stop loss".
This idea looks promising, but needs shortish prices (say < 2/1) to prevent long losing runs.
Something like:
Bet 1: to win £x. If win, reset and start again.
If bet 1 fail, then bet 2 to recover previous loss and win net £x. If win, reset and start again.
If bet 2 fail, then bet 3 to only recover losses from bets 1 and 2.
If bet 3 fail, then quit, accept the loss, and start again.
  Just thinking, not yet tried.

Mick B,
In general, I'm very much a singles punter. I have convinced myself the worst value bets are those between 4/6 and 6/4 (the range that the public and I seem to love). Geoff Banks once said: "the public love a shorty, but generally call it a day at 4/6".
I am now starting to trial doubles with approx 1/2 chances. (A pair of 1/2 double pays 5/4). The strike rate is looking higher than might be mathematically expected comparing 1/2 with the 4/6 - 6/4 chances. Early prices essential as the 1/2 frequently become 1/3 or shorter later on.
Early days.

Actually, I have had a few ideas along similar lines, but with a "stop loss".
This idea looks promising, but needs shortish prices (say < 2/1) to prevent long losing runs.
Something like:
Bet 1: to win £x. If win, reset and start again.
If bet 1 fail, then bet 2 to recover previous loss and win net £x. If win, reset and start again.
If bet 2 fail, then bet 3 to only recover losses from bets 1 and 2.
If bet 3 fail, then quit, accept the loss, and start again.
  Just thinking, not yet tried.

Corky,
 
 
Please Google: Martingale systems.

Sir Puntalot,
<<<
Thanks for the feedback.

Can you provide screenshots/links of exactly what you're talking about there? Then I can be sure 200% sure what it is you're wanting.
>>>
I can't provide screenshots, but this should be very clear:
From OLD Racing Post Homepage:
1. "Tips Section" at lottom left of homepage. Includes Tips, quotes, who's hot, stats.
2." Newspaper Naps Table", linked to (1) - and also apparantly not in the new Sporting Life site either. The SL was better than the RP as it included live prices.
3. The "Race in Focus" section on right had side of homepage. Pull down card for every race - includes prices, probablity of winning and number of tips.
 
Thanks,
 

If you're looking for suggestions, here's mine. It mainly refers to what's missing from the new look Racing Post.
From RP Homepage,Tips scetion - Tips quotes, who's hot, stats.
From RP Homepage, Race in Focus - Pull down card, with prices and probablity of winning,which I understand to be just an overround contribution to an early betting forecast. Nevertheless, I find it useful as a "value check" in one of my systems.

Just pushing my previous post a bit.
If we agree that it's perfectly reasonable for the trainer to give the owners the nod when the horse is at its best, is it reasonable to give the owners the nod for a "small" lay when the horse is not -? WITHOUT actively stopping it which is clearly unethical / illegal ?

What does this say about owners that stick with him (or his wife)?
Now owners reasonably expect to be given the nod when the trainers feeels the horse is at its best, though they shouldn't expect it to be stoppped on other days.

No mention has been made of systems. Being a technical / mathematical sort of person, this is how I started out, ie read up on some systems, then develop your own. Good advice might include the "kind" of races that are good/bad to get involved in (although our preferences may differ). Accept whether you want to back a high % of winners (for the buzz) which long term is usually inferior to backing longer price selections, but the more popular selections don't have the long losing runs. As you get more experienced, combine the blind system picks with fundamental knowledge. Learn how to understand the paper's "all in a line form guide". Staking plans - for most people, start with level stakes, then mabe vary "a bit" as you get more experienced. Develop a series of websites that suit your style for guidance. It's all about personal style and comfort zone.

At 10 am Shadow R was 4/1 win, or 4/5 place only (3) with 10 runners at PP. [I prefer 9 or 10 in the morning as it allows a couple of drop-outs and still 3 places.] So I've done a little place only "fun bet" (Fun bets normally lose!).
[Handy tip - Sometimes place only odds are slightly greater than each-way terms (though not in the above case which is 1/5 Place only vs 1/4 each way terms.) In those cases, if you want to back e/w, why not split bets, ie separate win and place, rather than e/w. Along similar lines, I feel (but haven't tried it) that a place only accumulator would often pay more than the Placepot.]
12.40pm, SR is 5/1 win, 10//1 Place only (3places) with PP.

Many times when I see a horse unseat the jockey I often think "AP would have stayed on that.".
I agree, STD had no need to apologise. STD is a 100% genuine good-guy.

Since the update, this seems to be lost - or has nobody got anything to get off their chest.

Mr Benn, Like you I tend to work on selective well fancied horses (95% favourites). These systems generally get you close, but suffer from a lot of seconditis. Here's something I look at to determine how "bad" the value is. Compare the price's overround contribution (2/1 = 33%) to the chances of victory shown on the home page of the RP website (bottom right) for every race. Backing favs, you can expect the price contribution to be 10% below fair chance - (but we are selective, so hope to beat that!). Sometimes though it's much worse and should be avoided. Have you considered a system based on unnamed "second favs" where the race stats are not good for the fav. Longer losing runs, but much better prices. You could either use unnamed 2nd favs or select the likely 2nd fav in the morning to get BOG. My bookmaker late father told me the smart second fav backer was tough to beat.