BILLY HILLS NAP TABLE - March 2023

[MCLARKE]

45 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

Yes, but the number of winners to get to a £20 profit can be far fewer

Not sure I'm following your logic with this

[harry_rag]

3 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

Not sure I'm following your logic with this

Glad it's not just me! I don't think the comment makes any sense at all. Unless I'm missing something, in the context of how you record the results then 1 point is effectively £1, the 2 are interchangeable.

[The Equaliser]

27 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Glad it's not just me! I don't think the comment makes any sense at all. Unless I'm missing something, in the context of how you record the results then 1 point is effectively £1, the 2 are interchangeable.

What I was kinda getting at was if the minimum number for most winners was 10 then if contributors got 10 winners at a minimum of 4/1 odds then they would have 40 points profit less 20 losers at 1 point = £20 profit.  I.e they would only need 10 winners or even less if they got better odds on other winning bets.

Sorry for the confusion

[Zilzalian]

2 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

I do agree with you.  It is very boring when our esteemed contributors reach the £10 profit and keep chucking in long odds on shots.  Maybe @Zilzalianwas right by suggesting £15 or even possibly £12 but I feel that it should be raised

It wasn't a suggestion it was more a musing "a casual opinion" i also said or agreed with @MCLARKE that if it aint broken dont fix it is a goo philosophy because we can all have ideas but we would just be being picky.

[Zilzalian]

BAN ALL ODDS ON SHOTS in all comps Yayyyyyyyy ??????

[Johnrobertson]

First competition I've  won since 2021 and I cause this uproar! 

I've been working on an odds on system anyone want to see it? ???

 

[The Equaliser]

1 hour ago, Johnrobertson said:

First competition I've  won since 2021 and I cause this uproar! 

I've been working on an odds on system anyone want to see it? ???

 

Trouble maker.................................Only kidding.  Congratulations in winning "the most winners" part of the Nap  comp. this month.   Richly deserved 

Edited March 29, 2023 by The Equaliser

[Gary66]

4 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

Eureka!!

To negate some of the lottery aspect of winning the main comp might I suggest a minimum of 3 winners in any one month.  This equates to about 10 % winners and bearing in mind that members can back each way I feel that it is not too onerous a target

Brilliant idea

[Alastair]

I am one of the "villains" here in that I have dared to adopt a strategy that gives me what I think would be the best chance of winning the Most Winners comp which I have won more often than anyone. I have never won the monthly comp or come close to it - the standard of tipping on this website is high and at least one punter will come up with a winner at 40/1+ every month and I have never tried to compete with that. But the point is that to get to £10 profit is actually pretty tough in a month - representing around 30% on turnover- and anyone who does so should be congratulated, not cut out of winning one of the competitions.

[The Equaliser]

40 minutes ago, Alastair said:

I am one of the "villains" here in that I have dared to adopt a strategy that gives me what I think would be the best chance of winning the Most Winners comp which I have won more often than anyone. I have never won the monthly comp or come close to it - the standard of tipping on this website is high and at least one punter will come up with a winner at 40/1+ every month and I have never tried to compete with that. But the point is that to get to £10 profit is actually pretty tough in a month - representing around 30% on turnover- and anyone who does so should be congratulated, not cut out of winning one of the competitions.

Well Ok, but you yourself have stated that in the real world, you never put money on a horse at less than 6/4 so you are putting up selections that you would never back.  Month after month we see someone get to the £10 profit level and then hang on in there with odds on shots.  It doesn't happen rarely it happens often.  Hence, I see no reason why the bar shouldn't be raised a bit 

[MCLARKE]

4 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

What I was kinda getting at was if the minimum number for most winners was 10 then if contributors got 10 winners at a minimum of 4/1 odds then they would have 40 points profit less 20 losers at 1 point = £20 profit.  I.e they would only need 10 winners or even less if they got better odds on other winning bets.

Good luck with getting 10 winners at 4/1 or more, I'll set you the challenge !

I agree with Alistair, achieving a £10 profit is not easy and should be commended not penalised

[MCLARKE]

3 hours ago, Johnrobertson said:

I've been working on an odds on system anyone want to see it? 

 

I would be very interested.

Odds on bets are fantastic and often offer great value. As I've said before I much prefer a 1/10 winner to a 10/1 loser.

I am just analysing the naps over the last 2 years and the most profitable area is those naps at 1/4 or less

94 wins from 103 selections (91% strike rate) with a profit of 11 points (10.4% ROI)

[The Equaliser]

4 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

 

I would be very interested.

Odds on bets are fantastic and often offer great value. As I've said before I much prefer a 1/10 winner to a 10/1 loser.

I am just analysing the naps over the last 2 years and the most profitable area is those naps at 1/4 or less

94 wins from 103 selections (91% strike rate) with a profit of 11 points (10.4% ROI)

I think he was joking.

I believe that if you find horses in a race with 10 or more points clear in the RPR ratings at short odds (avoiding abnormalities such as an un-raced super star etc) you will find that the success rate is very high indeed.  EclairDAinay was a good example today in the 1.25 at M/R @Johnrobertson's clincher.  RPR was 128 v 80 nearest rival. won by 27 lengths

[The Equaliser]

30 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

Good luck with getting 10 winners at 4/1 or more, I'll set you the challenge !

I agree with Alistair, achieving a £10 profit is not easy and should be commended not penalised

You only have to look to the naps table this month to see there are at least 3 contenders who were on a par with this.  @Wanderlust, @LordMulberryand @Gary66.  Understandably, they will try to win the comp with outsiders now because the most winners has been won.  

[MCLARKE]

40 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

You only have to look to the naps table this month to see there are at least 3 contenders who were on a par with this.  @Wanderlust, @LordMulberryand @Gary66.  Understandably, they will try to win the comp with outsiders now because the most winners has been won.  

Not really.

They have all picked some good big priced winners and some shorter priced ones.

Generally to win the naps competition you need a big priced winner somewhere in there. I think Wanderlust has had a 25/1 winner, Lord Mulberry 16/1 and Gary66 33/1.

[The Equaliser]

1 minute ago, MCLARKE said:

Not really.

They have all picked some good big priced winners and some shorter priced ones.

Generally to win the naps competition you need a big priced winner somewhere in there. I think Wanderlust has had a 25/1 winner, Lord Mulberry 16/1 and Gary66 33/1.

Ah OK, I stand corrected.

On the RPR +10 points I suggested for very short priced favourites I am wondering if anyone on here is a subscriber to the Racing Post.  If so they may be able to obtain the history of winners that were 10+ clear on RPR ratings.  If these horses win 8 out of 10 times then 1/2 looks like a juicy price.

This should also work with Timeform ratings but they have stopped me from getting them on the free plugin on Chrome and MS Edge

 

[MCLARKE]

A tough day with just 2 odds on winners

[MCLARKE]

Most winners

@Johnrobertsonsecures the title with 2 days to go. Congratulations, a very impressive 76% strike rate.

[Wanderlust]

12 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

Well Ok, but you yourself have stated that in the real world, you never put money on a horse at less than 6/4 so you are putting up selections that you would never back.  Month after month we see someone get to the £10 profit level and then hang on in there with odds on shots.  It doesn't happen rarely it happens often.  Hence, I see no reason why the bar shouldn't be raised a bit 

Stop moaning and complaining will you. 

[Peter York]

Congratulations @Johnrobertson 19 winners from 25 selections is an excellent strike rate ?

[The Equaliser]

2 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

Stop moaning and complaining will you. 

I am neither moaning or complaining, I was just engaging in a lively debate.  Can you not see that? I truly applaud @Alastairfor using the rules of the competition to win "the most winners" aspect of the Naps comp the most number of times.  The problem as I see it now is that many more members are copying him and then, usually for the remainder of any new month the comp becomes boring. 

Personally,  I don't give a toss whatever the minimal profit level is.  For my part, I will just play along with trying to find Naps at decent prices 3/1 + for a period during the month, which I believe to be the spirit of the competition.  Once I feel that I have achieved a decent profit level I may switch to odds on shots if I feel like having a go at trying to win it.  All very boring but hey, if that's the way to win then that's the way to go ?

[Zilzalian]

8 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

I am neither moaning or complaining, I was just engaging in a lively debate.  Can you not see that? I truly applaud @Alastairfor using the rules of the competition to win "the most winners" aspect of the Naps comp the most number of times.  The problem as I see it now is that many more members are copying him and then, usually for the remainder of any new month the comp becomes boring. 

Personally,  I don't give a toss whatever the minimal profit level is.  For my part, I will just play along with trying to find Naps at decent prices 3/1 + for a period during the month, which I believe to be the spirit of the competition.  Once I feel that I have achieved a decent profit level I may switch to odds on shots if I feel like having a go at trying to win it.  All very boring but hey, if that's the way to win then that's the way to go ?

I seem to remember once you betting favs ew to win the KO cup am i right?

[Wanderlust]

11 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

I am neither moaning or complaining, I was just engaging in a lively debate.  Can you not see that? I truly applaud @Alastairfor using the rules of the competition to win "the most winners" aspect of the Naps comp the most number of times.  The problem as I see it now is that many more members are copying him and then, usually for the remainder of any new month the comp becomes boring. 

Personally,  I don't give a toss whatever the minimal profit level is.  For my part, I will just play along with trying to find Naps at decent prices 3/1 + for a period during the month, which I believe to be the spirit of the competition.  Once I feel that I have achieved a decent profit level I may switch to odds on shots if I feel like having a go at trying to win it.  All very boring but hey, if that's the way to win then that's the way to go ?

I do not believe you followed the "spirit of the competition" about a year ago when we were head to head . You know what you did that day, no need for me to repeat it. I still won anyway. But get off the moral high ground. Its a free comp that brings happiness to most people who enter.

[Wanderlust]

5 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

I seem to remember once you betting favs ew to win the KO cup am i right?

And then arguing the toss that an odds on Fav backed each way and coming 2nd, should be considered a winner!!!!

[The Equaliser]

9 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

I seem to remember once you betting favs ew to win the KO cup am i right?

That is the way to win that comp.  I have won it twice.

[harry_rag]

14 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

Personally,  I don't give a toss whatever the minimal profit level is.

For someone so indifferent you’ve spent a lot of time and effort proposing amendments! I vote for “moaning and complaining” and “starting an argument in an empty room” over “engaging in a lively debate”. It was your initial praise for the excitement of the most winners comp that stirred all this up in the first place.

It comes over as a lack of gratitude and criticism of @MCLARKE’s running of the competition. I think a 2 month ban from the naps comp is merited! 

[The Equaliser]

5 minutes ago, Wanderlust said:

I do not believe you followed the "spirit of the competition" about a year ago when we were head to head . You know what you did that day, no need for me to repeat it. I still won anyway. But get off the moral high ground. Its a free comp that brings happiness to most people who enter.

Stop your personal attacks, it is not nice and not necessary

[The Equaliser]

Just now, harry_rag said:

For someone so indifferent you’ve spent a lot of time and effort proposing amendments! I vote for “moaning and complaining” and “starting an argument in an empty room” over “engaging in a lively debate”. It was your initial praise for the excitement of the most winners comp that stirred all this up in the first place.

It comes over as a lack of gratitude and criticism of @MCLARKE’s running of the competition. I think a 2 month ban from the naps comp is merited! 

Stop your personal attacks on me.  It is not nice and not necessary

[harry_rag]

Just now, The Equaliser said:

Stop your personal attacks on me.  It is not nice and not necessary

One paragraph of entirely fair comment followed by an obviously tongue in cheek suggestion.

You can’t cry foul every time people grow weary of your repeated posts on a subject and exercise their right to reply.

[The Equaliser]

7 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

One paragraph of entirely fair comment followed by an obviously tongue in cheek suggestion.

You can’t cry foul every time people grow weary of your repeated posts on a subject and exercise their right to reply.

Look mate, I am fed up with people regurgitating everything I have ever said or done in the past when I am discussing a current topical issue on the forum.

Is it really necessary?