Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested

[Guest CJ Mars]

Timeline Tested I can’t claim credit for this system. It is explained in detail by its creator Fender in the thread "Mastering the long losing run". As no one advocateing it seems willing to post selections I thought I would have a go and try to have some objective test of its merits. A couple of things I’d point out firstly: I am extremely skeptical about it as you’ll see if you read the thread. Having said that I’ll try to be as objective as possible about it as possible. Due to time constraints I will concentrate on the first 4 races in the morning races. These start at various times between 10.30 and 11.40 it seems and there are generally 3 qualifying meetings. The stakeing policy as advised by Fender will be used i.e Race 13 2 Points Race 14 2.5 Points Race 15 3.5 Points Race 16 4 Points Race 17 6 Points Race 18 9 Points Race 19 13 Points Start Bank will be 100 Units and I’ll try to concentrate on the exchanges (Betfair and Sporting Options). A big problem to me would be the small number of qualifying bets (all taken from Powers results). From the first of April(starting at Brushwood) to the 16th of April there were only 5 qualifying bets. It seems that it would be difficult to get enough bets to get any real idea of how good or otherwise the system is. These turned out as RUN 1 – Won on 13th run – 6/1 – Profit 12 Units :) RUN 2 – Won on 14th run – 4/1 – Profit 5.5 Units :) RUN 3 – Did not win Loss – 40 Units ** :( :( :( RUN 4 – Won on 13th run at 7/4 – Profit 3.5 Units :) RUN 5 – Won on 14th run at 7/2 – Profit 6.75 Units :) Total loss 12.75 Units :( At present (as of 17th April) Trap 4 hasn’t won in Race 1 in 12 outings and in Race 2 in 11 outings. If they do not win today I will take up with the appropriate stakes tomorrow. These will be 4 points for Race 1 and 3.5 points for Race 2. Dogs names to follow as appropriate. Note re losing run in April ** It seems to me that the dog in trap 4 race 4 in the morning meetings did not win from the race in Brushwood on the 7th April until the race in Sunderland on the 15th. This was a total of 21 races before the dog in that trap won. If Fender has any problems with my interpretation of the system or indeed the April results please feel free to let me know in this thread. Likewise if Fender feels I am misinterpreting his work then he is more than welcome to point out where I am going wrong :D

[Guest CJ Mars]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Ok no winners from Traps 3 or 4 at the morning meet in Romford so on to tomorrow.. Race 4 Trap 1 (14th) - Stake 2.5 Units SP Powers Trap 2 (13th) - Stake 2 Units SP Powers Follow stakeing plan as needed. All races run in chronological order (i.e race at 10.32 is the 14th for Trap 1 and race at 10.49 is 15th). Not sure I will get to pos tomorrow but hopefully should be clea enough who is the intended dog. First 3 race meetings only

[Guest boytractor]

Timeline CJ Mars - I may well be mistaken but I would be using Romford / Crayford as the morning meetings. I have no information regarding Brushwood so would definately not use it. My own interpretation is that I use 1st 4 races each meeting. This may well differ from Fender.

[Guest lufc]

Re: Timeline Race 4, Trap 4, has gone 18 races without a win. It last won on the 12:44 (Sunday time) on the 28th of march. You may argue 19 days but there was no meeting on Good Friday leaving it at 18. So stake plan = tomorrow full stake :) And in fenders system he ONLY uses traps 3 and 4. Never traps 1 (and 2). These arent as consistent. So if you are going by these traps you are flawing the system. They may win but it is not the advised system.

[Seen2001]

Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested

And in fenders system he ONLY uses traps 3 and 4. Never traps 1 (and 2)

Never traps 1 (and 2)? Strange that - I could have sworn he was bragging about backing a winner from trap 2 just a month ago...

Today 15/03/04 Trap 2 won the 11.48 AM at Sheffield. It came out on day 18 in my system at 3/1. It is the 5th winner of the month for me.

lol

[Guest lufc]

Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested He made a new thread (with new rules) after this date. This is the one where there has been all that criticism. In that thread he states traps 3 and 4 only. Youve tweaked a few rules in a few systems in a month aint ya? ;)

[Seen2001]

Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Ah, so he came on here claiming to have a system that he guaranteed would make a profit, after stating that he had analysed four years of results.

After analysing 4 years of greyhound results, I found that whenever any trap went 15 days without winning one of the first 4 races, it seldom made it past 20 days. In fact on average for every 10 times the losing streak went to 15 days, only 2 would make it past 20. Using this knowledge I formulated a chart & staking plan to start betting on any trap that hit 15 days without winning. Now bearing in mind that the average winning price of a greyhound is 7/2. Using a staking plan as follows i.e 20,25,30,40,50 (races 15-19) Over a month a profit is guaranteed.

Now you are saying that, soon after his first post on here making those claims, he changed the rules? After checking four years of results and apparantly backing them for 8 months, he has now decided to alter the rules. Don't you think that's a bit odd? And how come you're his spokesman, you not a sad multi-id guy are you?

[Guest lufc]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Why would he need a spokesman? How can he possibly benefit from people using his system? He's not exactly setting up a service that charges. Anyway it says youre a moderator, im sure you can check ip's hehe :) , if not youll have to take my word for it.

I have decided from now on I only bet on traps 3 & 4 in the timeline system. Their consistency is nothing short of stunning. When I have experienced losses within my system they're nearly always traps 1,2,5,& 6 that go beyond a losing run of 19 days. So from now on I will be betting on traps 3 & 4 in the first 4 races of the 2 morning cards. And the first 4 races of the two afternoon cards to increase my qualifying frequency.

That is a quote from the other thread he started. Think that explains the change of rules hehe :)

[Seen2001]

Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested It doesn't really explain why though - surely he would have realised this after 4 years of analysis? Perhaps, just perhaps, he had some losers from traps 1, 2, 5 or 6 in between his two threads. What do you think? Well we wouldn't know because he steadfastly refused to post his selections and stakes up here before they ran, like he was asked to several times. This is a loss-recovery plan which is basically betting at very short odds to a high strike rate using a back-fitted system. A recipe for disaster to anyone with even the smallest amount of knowledge in this field.

[Guest lufc]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Basically what he was saying was the majority of losers that came out of this system (when they did) came from the outter 4 traps. Im sure they still struck a profit but if the majority of losers come from those traps, and traps 3 & 4 had a higher strick rate then why not eliminate the other traps for a higher percentage of winners. He didnt refuse to post his selections, he said he didnt post them as he did not expect a winner on any particular date. I beleive also he said somewhere he didnt have alot of net access but cant find the quote for it :) But he did indeed give out his system, gave the staking plan, the times, and any other details needed. It wouldnt be very difficult for someone to check for themselves? I have made out a few small .doc's on each race time, id be more than happy to send that to you (or anyone else who'd want it). Also i have no problem in taking this system up and posting selections as they come.

[Guest DannyCash]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Yes, I'll be very interested to see how this goes. I'm suprised Fender himself hasn't contributed to this particular thread yet! However, I'm not suprised that your trial of this amazing system is already suffering a loss. I will shortly be posting my casino system where I wait 360 spins for a number not to have shown and then back this number for the next 360 spins. It is guaranteed to make you a profit but I will not be selling it, instead I will be trying to prove to experienced punters on this thread that I am capable of mastering the long losing run. The only thing is, that this system works for only certain numbers....

[Guest lufc]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested

Race 4, Trap 4, has gone 18 races without a win. It last won on the 12:44 (Sunday time) on the 28th of march. You may argue 19 days but there was no meeting on Good Friday leaving it at 18. So stake plan = tomorrow full stake

Meeting: HOVE Date: 18/04/2004 Time: 12:44 Name: 12:44 (A9) 515mtrs Position: Name: S/P 1 (4) Sister Sophia 5/2 2 (3) Im Merlyn 7/2 3 (2) Pevensey Doyle 5/2

[Guest fender2004]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested CJ your analysis is incorrect. I don't bet on VIRTUAL greyhound racing. Only real meets. That represents the first two real meetings of the morning typically 11.26 sunderland & 11.34 sheffield for example. Virtual greyhound racing is a new concept and I don't have years of research to proof its reliability. However I do not trust any mechanical games of chance. I would never bet in a casino for example. Because I am wise enough to know that without pure luck or cheating it is extremely hard to formulate a winning system on games of chance. In response to Danny Cash and his humourous jibe about a winning Roulette system. Think why it is virtually impossible to beat it in the first place. You have 36 possible outcomes. on a mechanical game of chance. In greyhound racing you've 6 possible outcomes on a real life flesh & blood sport. THAT is a world of difference to start with.

[Guest Boof Bonk Boosh]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested I am interested in hearing more about you Casino system. Where does the number of spins figure come from...?

[Guest fender2004]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Seen I wouldn't call an average sp of 7/2 short odds. even money or worse is short odds. Listen you are failing to understand that any system can be improved. I am not saying this system is perfect. I am entering a period where I am becoming cautious over what I bet on to protect the profits I have made. And TRAPS 3 AND 4. Are the most consistent BY FAR of all 6 traps. So it makes sense to concentrate on them from now on. When I first started using this system 8 months ago after 3.5 years of analysis I used all 6 traps up until recently. Because although my betting frequency was greater, my strike rate wasn't as good. Now concentrating on those two traps alone the win to loss ratio can be as good as 14-1. As opposed to 8-1 for all 6 traps. Betting less and winning more often is something that appeals to me greatly. Especially as I will be reaching a point in the near future where this system will be capable of making a living for me.

[Seen2001]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested

Seen I wouldn't call an average sp of 7/2 short odds. even money or worse is short odds.

Fender - your total risk for each trap you follow is 40pts, this is the amount you are resigned to losing if the trap does not win one of the 6 races. So in effect, an average SP of 7/2 in line with your staking plan would actually return the following odds for each particular race they won... race 1 - 2pts staked, 9pts returned, profit 7pts. True odds of winner in proportion to total risk - 2/11 race 2 - 2.5pts staked, 11.25pts returned, profit 8.75pts. True odds of winner in proportion to total risk - 2/9 race 3 - 3.5pts staked, 15.75pts returned, profit 12.25pts. True odds of winner in proportion to total risk - 3/10 race 4 - 4pts staked, 18pts returned, profit 14pts. True odds of winner in proportion to total risk - 4/11 race 5 - 6pts staked, 27pts returned, profit 21pts. True odds of winner in proportion to total risk - 8/15 race 6 - 9pts staked, 40.5pts returned, profit 31.5pts. True odds of winner in proportion to total risk - 4/5 race 7 - 13pts staked, 58.5pts returned, profit 45.5pts. True odds of winner in proportion to total risk - 11/10 As I said, you are running a loss-recovery staking plan backing at veyr short odds at a high strike rate. The problem with these loss-recovery plans if the full bets and stakes aren't shown (as in your case) then the results look great when you only show the winning bets - a high strike rate and nice odds too. But the odds for the individual winners shouldn't be treated as a single bet as you are in fact risking 40 points on every qualifier. This causes an illusion making the system appear far better than it actually is. This is why I wanted you to post full bets and stakes before the races, then people could see the true risk/returns.

[Guest CJ Mars]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Ok bit of controversy already. LUFC according to my records Trap 4 won at race 4 in Sunderland on 15th April – Artistry at 5/2. Also as I understood the system it was 13 races as opposed to 13 days? If like you say LUFC a trap had gone 28 days without a win then surely there would have been a maximum loss of 40 points taken on that already? I included the Romford results from Saturday. Trap 4 – Race 1 Run 14 – Romford -2.5 Points :rolleyes Run 15 – Perry Bar –3.5 Points :rolleyes Run 16 – Millersfield – 4 Points :rolleyes Run 17 – Hove - + 15 Points (Winner at 5/2) :eek Trap 4 – Race 2 Run 14 – Romford -2 Points :rolleyes Run 15 – Perry Bar –2.5 Points :rolleyes Run 16 – Millersfield – 3.5 Points :rolleyes Run 17 – Hove - -4 Points :rolleyes Started a new run with Trap 3 – Race 3 (hasn’t won in 13 outings) Run 17 – Hove – 2 points Bets 9 Staked 20 Points Returned 15 Points Loss 5 Points :x Win/ Lose 1/8 Again as I said before If my analysis is incorrect and I’m perverting :) anyone’s system then they should speak up. Getting the results and posting them is not time consuming in any fashion. For today am “advisingâ€: ================================ Trap 3 – Race 3 Continue with stakeing plan until winner hit: Run 14 - Brushwood 10.42 – 2.5 Points Run 15 - Sheffiled 12.02 - 3.5 Points Run 16 - Swindon – 4 Points Trap 4 – Race 2 Run 18 Brushwood 10.32 – 6 Points Run 19 Sheffiled 11.48 – 9 Points

[Guest fender2004]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Seen, I can't understand why you are finding it so difficult to understand the basics of my system. But I will try and explain it to you in stages. (Stage 1) I am concerned about 8 races each day. The times are as follows Monday to Friday. (11.26am) (11.34am) (11.41am) (11.48am) (13.48pm) (13.58pm) (2.08pm) (2.18pm) This is the first thing you and anybody else followong my system must understand. I have put times instead of races because some people like CJ mars are getting confused, and think I mean the earliest virtual racing times which start around 10.20am in the morning. For the record I do not bet on VIRTUAL RACING PERIOD. That means no Brushwood or millersfield at all, okay CJ ? (Stage 2) I am only concerned about two traps, (Trap 3 & trap 4) Now the next thing which people are not understanding and this is partly my fault, is this. TRAP 3 OR 4 MOST GO 13 DAYS WITHOUT WINNING ANY OF THOSE 8 RACES TO QUALIFY IN MY SYSTEM. So for example if trap 3 last won the first race of the day (the 11.26am) on the 6th of April, today it would qualify for me to start betting on it tommorrow. This is very important for people to understand. Secondly (and this is my mistake) a betting run in my system lasts for seven days, so if I start betting on the 14th day, I finish on the 20th day. A maximum of *7* bets. So I am trying to achieve a win between the 14th day & the 20th day. (Stage 3) The staking plan I use is based on three levels Level 1 1 1.25 1.75 2 3 4.5 6.5 Level 2 2 2.5 3.5 4 6 9 13 Level 3 3 3.75 5.25 6 9 13.5 19.5 So that is a total of 20pts, 40pts, 60pts in total. I use points so anybody can adjust the ammount they stake to suit their pocket. A point could be worth anything form 10p to £50.00. (stage4 ) The reason I use three staking levels is simple. In order to protect your profits as much as possible, you must learn when to raise and lower your stakes. This part of my system is very much like a good poker player, making the right decision as when to go all in or raise their stakes to maximize the potential of a strong hand. Basically The time I raise to the maximum staking level, is straight after a losing run the reason is simple. The chances of suffering two consecutive losing runs are virtually zero. It hasn't happenned in 4.3 years. That is how rare it is. The time I lower my staking level to level two (40 pts) is when I have enjoyed 4 consecutive wins. And after 8 consecutive wins I lower it to level 1 (20 pts). And stay there until I suffer a losing run. Only once have I suffered a losing run at the maximum staking level. Now anybody wanting to follow my system must understand all that I have mentioned in this post. If you don't let me know and I will try to clarify it further. Forget what I said in my initial post, I have revised my system to work at the most efficient level. The only way you're going to know if it works or not is to follow it for at least the next 6 months yourselves. Seen keeps accusing me of not posting races and stakes. I don't have the time to get on here every single day. So if you really want to see this system working for yourselves, you've to be bothered to follow it for yourselves. I will post when possible qualifiers for both trap 3 & 4 in the 8 race times I have aforementioned. Then it is up to you to track their progress using my staking plan. He also keeps stating that this is a loss recovery staking plan. All systems are based on trying to turn a profit from a series of bets, therefore what is the difference. Maybe seen knows something that we don't. But I know of no system that makes any decent profit from betting level stakes all the time. Think of a game like poker, the people who become great champions don't do so by always staking the same ammount every time. They've to raise their stakes & even go all in at the right time to progress. It's the same with blackjack, stay on level stakes and the house will always win in the end. Raise at the right time and you've a good chance of taking the house. Any questions are most welcome. Kindest regrads Fender...

[Guest CJ Mars]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Fender Thanks for the clarification. The 4-stage breakdown makes it easier to follow. I think I had gotten it bar the fact that I was including virtual racing and I am still a bit confused re stage 1 (see below). I’ve only bet on dogs in the social context so am not sure about the subtleties. A couple of questions: 1.        Which are the virtual race meets that I can throw out? 2.        If I only bet on the first 4 races in the morning is the system still valid in your view. It would seem that very few bets would be thrown up. This is a time issue for me as I can’t really afford to spend a huge amount of time digging around. 3.        What happens if there are say 2 or three morning meetings? Do you just take the earliest times of the first 4 races as above? 4.        Do you mean 13 days as opposed to 13 races before you bet. It seems like a very long time if say there were 2 races a day qualifying. (This question related to question 1 above). 5.        Is it possible for you to give the example for just one day. i.e Race 1 – Brough Park 2 pts etc. I’ll post my start point and see are you in agreement with it? Again if I am making any errors in my assumptions please point them out. Thanks in advance

[Guest fender2004]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Cj never bet on any virtual meets. We are only concerned about REAL greyhound racing. Yes you can concentrate on the first 4 races only if you want to. Or even the first 8 in the morning. That would be the first 4 races from each of the two cards. Between trap 3 & trap 4 you'll average 7 qualifying bets per month if you just concentrate on the first 4 races. Remember it's not how often you bet, but how much you profit from each win. I myself was betting very frequently in the beginning and taking big risks to boost my betting bank quickly. An incredible average of a 50% growth per month. Now I am up to a level where I can make an average of over £600 per month without risking more than an average of 8% of my total betting bank. Once I reach a betting bank total of £10,000. I will be able to generate an average of £1,200 per month. Enough to sustain a living. 13 days is the number of days without either trap 3 or 4 WINNING in the 8 race times I have outlined. So you commence betting on the 14th day. E.g if the last time trap 3 won the 11.26am was the 1st of March you would've commenced betting on it on the 15th of March. Do you understand that ?

[Guest lufc]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested

Ok bit of controversy already. LUFC according to my records Trap 4 won at race 4 in Sunderland on 15th April – Artistry at 5/2.

Race 4 = 11:48 am Race 4 at Sunderland on the 15th April was the 12:09pm. I think i have basically got the gist of the system, and have hence made .doc's going back roughly a month and a half and have each traps days without winning clearly makred. I have only 5 out of 8 finished atm and am starting #6 now, i have no objections into sending you these files into helping you understand the system better :)

Also as I understood the system it was 13 races as opposed to 13 days? If like you say LUFC a trap had gone 28 days without a win then surely there would have been a maximum loss of 40 points taken on that already?

Just days is all thats concerned, if the 11:26 for example wins on lets say Day 0, it then loses on Day 1 through 12 (note: it is usually a different meeting each day for each of the races) then you start backing with the proposed stake plan on days 13 through 19, or until the dog wins between those days :)

[Seen2001]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested

Seen, I can't understand why you are finding it so difficult to understand the basics of my system.

Why do you think I don't understand the basics of your system? I understand it perfectly well, as explained in my previous posts. I think it's more a case of seeing right through it. I must congratulate you on finally, after several weeks, posting a clear indication of what the hell you are on about. Your previous postings were as clear as mud and full of contradictions.

Forget what I said in my initial post...

As yes - your initial post told us this.... "Hi to all, I have a simple but effective system I would like to share with you all. It involves betting on greyhounds & concentrates on the first 4 races each day on the two morning cards. This system relies on only one thing, THE LONG LOSING STREAK. After analysing 4 years of greyhound results, I found that whenever any trap went 15 days without winning one of the first 4 races, it seldom made it past 20 days. In fact on average for every 10 times the losing streak went to 15 days, only 2 would make it past 20. Using this knowledge I formulated a chart & staking plan to start betting on any trap that hit 15 days without winning. Now bearing in mind that the average winning price of a greyhound is 7/2. Using a staking plan as follows i.e 20,25,30,40,50 (races 15-19) Over a month a profit is guaranteed." In that post you told us that you had analysed the results for 4 YEARS, yet when you posted your 2nd thread (mastering the losing run) after an absence of 8 days from the board, you suddenly alter the rules, now stating that only traps 3 and 4 must be used. 8 days previously you were telling us to watch out for traps 1 and 5 - please tell us, were there any bets on these traps during your 8 days away from the board? If so, did any of them win? If not we must presume that you lost your full risk on them (be it 20, 40 or 60 points, whichever staking plan you were losing). A cynical person might suggest this is why you started a new thread when you returned, rather hoping the initial thread (The Timeline Greyhound System) would drop off the 1st page and into obscurity, where no-one would read it and note all the contradictions ;) Another thing is bugging me - in your initial post you said "After analysing 4 years of greyhound results, I found that whenever any trap went 15 days without winning one of the first 4 races, it seldom made it past 20 days. In fact on average for every 10 times the losing streak went to 15 days, only 2 would make it past 20. Using this knowledge I formulated a chart & staking plan to start betting on any trap that hit 15 days without winning.....Using a staking plan as follows i.e 20,25,30,40,50 (races 15-19)" - 15 days? Doesn't your system now state a different number (14)? And what's with that staking plan, that seems different to the one you claim to be using now too. Only 5 bets? For a system that has been researched for 4 YEARS and which has been making you fortunes for 8 months or so, how odd that you suddenly TOTALLY change the main frigging rules just a few days after coming on with such bullish claims? Now can you see why I can smell bullsh1t? That's the problem with liars on the internet, you see - they leave evidence in their posts which means they can be checked out. People who frequent these boards aren't idiots - well, give or take one or two anyway ;) Not long ago you said this...

Boytractor, thankyou for trying to make the doubters see sense. Unfortunately it will be a losing battle. These people cannot think for themselves, they have probably read various articles on what works and supposedly doesn't work for betting stratedgies. And they would rather take it as the holy grail, rather than be bothered to see if it works for themselves.

Funnily enough I can think for myself - in fact I actually get paid to write a systems analysis each month for a horse racing club newsletter. That obviously doesn't mean that I'm right about every thing I say, but at the same time I would hardly hold the position down for very long if I couldn't think for myself (hope I don't get sacked next month :) ). LOSS RECOVERY STAKING PLANS are used for one reason and one reason only - to make a system appear better than it actually is. This is a fact. These kind of plans don't comply with logic and are basically no different than the actions of those pathetic addicts who chase their losses by increasing their stakes after a bad day. As Rio has said on another thread - if one dog has no better chance than another then where is the logic in staking a larger sum of money on it? Next I'm going to show you an example of how backfitting some random and illogical rules around past results can make an apparantly brilliant and foolproof system, yet when run in real time just does not work.

[Mr Intensity]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Seen........the only mackem worth knowing :D :ok

[Seen2001]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested

This system has worked for me for 8 months now. And the results show a system working for 4.3 years. If that isn't long enough to prove something works I don't know what is.

Okay, I will now show how easy it is to come up with a seemingly infallible system by using backfitting methods. Using my horse-racing database (RSB), I looked at years 1996-2000 inclusive. These are the rules I used to backfit my system, none of them have any logic behind them (just like the Timeline system) and they have been cherrypicked to form a winning system... 1) The SP must be between 6/1 and 15/2 2) The weight carried on the horses last run must have been between 8-1 and 8-7 or between 9-8 and 10-0 (inclusive) 3) The horse must have finished 2nd on his penultimate outing (that's 2 races ago to the not-so-bright brigade :) ) Okay, let's run those rules through RSB years 96-00 and see what we get...

  

YEAR    WINS    RUNS   STRIKE%        LSP     LSP%      VSP%



1996      28     172    16.28       36.50    21.22     23.78

1997      23     156    14.74       12.50     8.01     10.80

1998      23     166    13.86        8.00     4.82      4.98

1999      32     176    18.18       70.50    40.06     36.76

2000      24     134    17.91       45.00    33.58     34.06

____________________________________________________________



         130     804    16.17      172.50    21.46     21.95

That looks good - an excellent profit in 96 followed by a decent one in 97. Only a LSP% of 4.82% in 98 but imagine how that could have been increased massively with a double-your-stake-until-you-hit-a-winner staking plan. 99 was nothing short of stunning as was 2000, surely this must continue to make good profits - after all there have been 804 bets so the sample size is large enough, and lets face it, if 5 years isn't long enough to prove something works I don't know what is :) Okay, now on to year 2001's results...

  

YEAR    WINS    RUNS   STRIKE%        LSP     LSP%      



2001      17     165    10.30      -36.50   -22.12    

Oh dear, what happened there? Fairly heavy losses of 22.12% ROI. Even with a super staking plan you would be in trouble with those results. Perhaps it was a fluke year? How did 2002 do?

  

YEAR    WINS    RUNS   STRIKE%        LSP     LSP%      



2002      15     164     9.15      -55.50   -33.84    

Jesus, that's even worse! A LSP% loss of almost a third of total outlay! Disaster. What about 2003?

  

YEAR    WINS    RUNS   STRIKE%        LSP     LSP%      



2003      19     131    14.50        9.50     7.25      

A better year, but unfortunately after such heavy losses in the previous 2 years I ended up bankrupt and homeless, so had no money left to back them. The lesson here? DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ!

[Seen2001]

Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Mr I - shhhh! Don't tell everyone, it's bloody embarrassing :lol

[Mr Intensity]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested You're enjoying this prove idiots wrong this, aren't you? :D

[Guest CJ Mars]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested This one has got pretty heated. My intention in offering to proof these bets was to show whether or not it was possible to make a profit using the methods. My position is clear in that I am very much a non believer but I did believe that perhaps the best method would simply to let the results do the talking. I now believe that it is simply not possible to really even do this. The main problem with this system is that there are simply going to be so few bets a month that I am not sure that any worthwhile STATISTICAL conclusions can be drawn. I would imagine that it would definitely be possible to make significant profits in a given time period. Having said that the risk of losing a significant portion of the bankroll would also be to me unacceptably large. My belief is that the winnings might mirror what Seen has posted above but again I am sure that the believers and non believers will have their own views. With the above in mind I think now it is pretty pointless for me to try and track this as I don’t think any limited results set will sway anyone either way as opinions seem set in stone. An honest backtest over a period of a year (or maybe even 6 months) might be possible for someone with slightly more time, inclination and interest in greyhounds than I have. In any case best of luck if you intend to follow this stakeing methodology. You can’t say you weren’t warned if things go belly up and if you do well then hats of to you ;) .

[Norfolk Enchance]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Brilliant post Seen :clap Sums it up perfectly

[Guest fender2004]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Seen2001, you've a point there. But that wasn't based on the long losing run. Also even in the best years the strike rate never rose above 30%. Can you clarify by what percentage the initial betting bank grew by after the first 5 years before it went pear shaped ? So for example if the initial betting bank started at 100pts. After the first 5 years did it increase to 500pts 1000pts etc ? What makes the timeline different to other backfitted systems as you call them, is it tackles the long losing run directly. I have seen many systems like the one you illustrated, and I agree ultimately they'll fail because they need something special to happen in order for them to be successful. The timeline needs nothing to happen other than what will always happen anyway. Long losing runs. That is the major difference, and why I am so confident that this system will work forever. In fact I am so confident that this system will continue to work, that I am willing to have a wager with you on it. You name the time slot that satisfies you and we will agree a sum of money. I will as they say put my money where my mouth is. You continue to attack my staking plan also seen, my question or rather challenge to you is to show a system that can make decent money (AT LEAST 200% turnover annually) using level stakes all the time. I have revised my system to a point where I am more than confident it will work forever. I will enjoy proving all the sceptics like you wrong over the coming years. Trap 3 & 4 produced 33 qualifiers so far in 2004 over the 8 races I follow. And they have produced 33 winners. That is a 33-0 winning streak. I understand why people doubt, nobody really believes the bookmakers can be taken, and taken good. Over the next few years I intend to make serious waves in the betting industry. And the timeline system will be at the heart of this.

[Guest fender2004]

Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested CJ you will average 8 qualifiers a month using my system. Remember it is not how many times you bet, but how many times you WIN. I have only had 4 qualifiers so far this month but I have had 4 winners. Do you understand ? Don't run with the pack and live in the bookie or online, that will gaurantee failure I can assure you of that. It really is quality over quantity with the Timeline system. Have patience, be prepared to wait & you will be rewarded. It isn't a race, just ask yourself this question, can you find a system that will give you an average winning sp of 7/2. With an average of 4 bets per win. And a strike rate of 12 wins for every loss ? If you can then you've a better system than the Timeline, and I say go for it. If you can't consider at least watching my system for the rest of this year, and I think it will truly win you over...