Jump to content
Announcements
*** Aintree Festival Competition: Well done to 1st. Sugardaddyken, 2nd. Soi Bongkot & 3rd. Roy Keane ***
** March Poker League Result : 1st muttley, 2nd andybell666, 3rd ian309 **
** Football Tipster Competition Result : 1st MABS, 2nd PercyP, 3rd Kingdom for, 4th Catijohn, 5th runadrum **
** March Naps Competition Result: 1st GARY66, 2nd TRAINMAD091, 3rd ZIDANE123, 4th MICK33. KO Cup Winner SILVER FOX, Most Winners: ALASTAIR **

Valiant Thor

Regular Members
  • Content Count

    3786
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Valiant Thor last won the day on November 14 2020

Valiant Thor had the most liked content!

4 Followers

About Valiant Thor

  • Rank
    Alien in the Whitehouse
  • Birthday 11/19/1960

Recent Profile Visitors

8644 profile views
  1. I think you'd want to re think that, your buying @ approaching peak , the majority of profit has gone. Ok if your a trader playing with other peoples money and taking of a cut per trade, but as an investor its a big no no as the next step is on the way down do the math , where can a stock go from peak certainly not upwards. They better take the Shiller list off all the trading markets then if thats the case as they've been doing the PE ratios wrong since the 30's. To quote Warren Buffet Exit when the PE's are high and enter when the PE's are low Im led believe he has a good
  2. You say you make money on the stock-market, then why are you asking the above question,the answer should be blindingly obvious. I suggest reading the Neiderhoffer / Osbourne paper "The Magna Carta of High Frequency Trading" Then use Robert Shillers 10yr moving average on the trainers PE value and therein lies your answer At the moment you are in effect buying-in @ at the high PE ratio which is a no no
  3. Rachel Candelora is one Id actually listen too He gives a jockey/horseman's view rather than actual tips but does make sense
  4. 1/4 shots have an implied probability of 80% therefore should lose approx 20% of the time In 1000 bets there will be approx 200 losers not 4 Its the 200 losers that have an Implied probability losing sequence ratio of 4 (4.29) in 1000 bets I believe that's the same advice advocated by Dave Nevison (Failed Gambler,failed tipster) in one of his books who now sells his wares on Racing TV as some sort of expert mustn't be paying him that much as he looks like a tramp whose just slept in a skip when Ive seen him on tv. Mind you John McCririck made a decent living out of talking c
  5. Material World...... ran in 2008 World Hurdle @ Chelt
  6. More like 30yrs ago BELPER trained by John Dunlop
  7. just stores all your data , has data analysis built in can do graphs etc etc
  8. I don't know what's in the updated version , but the version I had recommended Lotus 1-2-3 for the spreadsheets
  9. All horses have some chance of winning however slight it may be,by omitting some horses you would create a false market The no hoper could be the faller that brings the fav down. In a word ...NO
  10. I think your confusing basic maths with basic stats totally different
  11. I wouldnt worry about it too much if I were you, I know people who cant even price up a £5 note, never mind a horse-race despite 20+ years of trying. I had it priced @ 9/4 and even using a cheap and nasty method using RPR's (below) it was a 5/2 shot, so I thought you were a bit OTT looking for 4/1 but practice makes perfect. 👍 (anyone with basic stats should be able to work the above out and how I came about it) If you want to do what you say you want to do dont get disheartened if things dont work out straight away, & dont do what 99% do and take the easy way out an
  12. WEEK 11 Think Ive found the problem, The date and time for the games downloaded from 1 site were causing an error when looking for the odds on another site due to time/date of game being changed or in a different format. (times and dates for the games have been published in advance and any changes are beyond my control) Anyway see how it goes . **Weeks 9 & 10 will be missing from the Season to Date results as no selections were made due to no spreads being recorded.** Just the NAP bet this week
  13. Its down to what weighting the cd winner has or has not got over non cd winners Lets look at some imaginary data from 295 10 horse races (2950 runners no dead heats so 295 winners) From the 2950 runners we have 550 previous cd winners of which go on to win 65 of these races (11.8% sr) That leaves 2400 non previous cd winners that win 230 of these races (9.6%) So to find a weighting for a previous cd winner you divide the races cd winners 65 by races total winners 295 =.22% then divide total previous cd winner runners 550 by the total runners 2950 = 19% Finally divide cd winn
  14. 19/20 aged 6 to 9 ..............80% of the field fell into that category so a blind man in a dark room could have seen that Pref below 11st 2lb...............So were 50% of the field 16/20 .....a previous winner at over 2m4f plus.......As It was a valuable 2m5f race , I would at the very least expect the horse to be competitive at that distance or why else would they be entered , for the fun of it ? 8/20 won at chelt previously......from 1079 pre race CD winners in the last 12 month 1743 won (13%) so sort of blows the 8/20 (40%) out of the water , when taking large data into the equa
×
×
  • Create New...