Guest DannyCash Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested I have been reading and laughing at this thread for many weeks now. Fender you are one stubborn guy! Seen has clearly highlighted the many contradtictions in your thread/s and yet you still persist that this system will work for many years to come. If only we knew which system/staking plan you were going to operate from week to week? I eagerly await Seen's response to your "challenge" and hope you fall flat on your face for being so adamant about your "amazing" discovery and for putting people (who have been writing for years on this forum) down. Danny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Danny where is there a rule written that someone cannot revise a good system to make it a great system ? My first post on here wasn't properly thought out. I was waiting to see if anyone would even respond. My staking plan wasn't properly stated as it now is. And like I have already admitted the qualifying span was incorrect in my initial post. The post that seen congratulated me (I should be flattered) for is exactly correct. It will never change, because it can't be bettered. I offer it for nothing for any to follow on paper, or using a small betting bank. You can laugh all you want, the question is can you truly come up with a better system to take the bookmakers. Before you're so quick to dismiss, give it a proper look. If after 6 months you think it isn't worth trying, fair play to you. I have no doubts this system is one of the greatest ever devised, not just because I created it, but because it tackles the very thing that makes all other systems fail. THE LONG LOSING RUN. It matters not how long someone has been involved in betting. I am 40 years old and have been following systems and betting stratedgies for nearly 20 years. I know what works, and what doesn't stand a chance. And the one area that has never been looked into properly is the nature of long losing runs. I decided to concentrate on this side of betting stratedgy, rather than following the ruit most people do. And my efforts have been rewarded with a system that I consider nothing short of great. Time will show you all the potential of the Timeline. And I believe more people will be willing to take it seriously a year from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DannyCash Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Fender, firstly I am glad that you have admitted your original system HAS been revised somewhat. I think this is what has irritated many people on here. I am personally not keen on fellow punters trying to "sell" their system to others in the way you have done, confidently guarenteeing us winners and then changing the rules all of a sudden. Show your readers on here some RESPECT man! Now to answer your question: the question is can you truly come up with a better system to take the bookmakers I don't think many people on here WANT to come up with a system. It has taken me many years, although not as many as you, to understand that there is no magic system. Each race or event must be interpreted differently as a separate event. You can use one of many systems to attempt to understand and solve any specific race. It is not as easy as shunning all form and blindly following trap numbers, no matter how many years of results you care to show me. THIS SYSTEM WILL FAIL!!! I have no doubts this system is one of the greatest ever devised, not just because I created it a system that I consider nothing short of great Fender, you must sort your attitude out if you want people to take you seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Danny you are as certain my system will fail as I am that it will suceed. So why do you acuse me of having a bad attitude ? You refuse to believe that even a losing run can have a common limit, WHY ? You have resigned yourself to not being able to better the Bookmaker so you presume everybody else should take the same attitude. Have you ever considered the possibilty that your thinking is wrong ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DannyCash Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested I am accusing you of having a bad attitude because you are gloating and bragging about your system when you have shown nothing to prove that it works to any of us. You have given us varied staking plans based around a trap number NOT winning over specific times and a certain number of days. It may win for you a lot of the time but you can not guarentee that it will win every time because the whole idea is based around luck. This system of yours will fail beause one losing run will wipe out your entire bank. Why does this system only work, so far, for trap 4. why? why? why? If it has failed on traps 1,2,3,5 and 6 then surely you can see it will fail on trap 4 eventually. For a 40 year old you are very naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest whoneedsrio Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Seen, A perfect suming up in your posts but as you comented in the other thread I fear we are bashing our heads against the wall. :banghead Danny, I fear also you are going to end up with a spliting headache. :banghead Fender quotes "Danny you are as certain my system will fail as I am that it will suceed. So why do you acuse me of having a bad attitude ? You refuse to believe that even a losing run can have a common limit, WHY ? You have resigned yourself to not being able to better the Bookmaker so you presume everybody else should take the same attitude. Have you ever considered the possibilty that your thinking is wrong ?" How do you know Danny can not better the bookie? How do you know his thinking is wrong? I can't remember Danny making wild unproven statements about his profits. You have shown us nothing in real time, its all backfitted as Seen as said. I am accused of having a go at Fender in boytractors latest greyhound thread, just to even things up I'll have a go at BT in this one. First off the 4x4x4x4 multiple, this disappeared at the end of March showing a loss of over £600. Of course we are told that this was just a system and not the real bets, during Cheltenham week BT had two good bets up netting over £200 and £750, but these were not posted up before hand. BT doesn't believe in after timing though. Then we have the 4x4x4x4 with real money, this ended after two days £50+ down and as not resurfaced since. Then theres the greyhound forcast system starts 4th April, ends 5th April!! and checking the results traps 5 and 4 did not appear on the morning of the 5th. I've covered the latest idea in the nobodys thought of it before :rolleyes greyhound thread. What we have here are two peas from the same pod, both of whom seem to want us to worship at their altar. It seems to me gentlemen that you will have to do with lufc ( please tell me thats not my beloved whites! ) Rio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Intensity Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested I was going to mention those 4x4x4x4x4x4x4x4 things :rollin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Danny your answers to my questions, make me realize that you don't fully understand my system still. So I will try to clarify the points you don't understand. Firstly I don't just concentrate on trap 4. As of the beginning of this month. I decided to concentrate on both TRAP3 & TRAP4. Because their consistency is greater than the other traps. The system on all 6 traps produces an average of 8 wins to 1 loss. For trap 3 & 4, this average jumps to an average of 12 wins to one loss. Do you understand that ? Secondly, One loss does not wipe out my entire betting bank, where did you get that from ? It takes an average of 4 wins to equal 1 loss. Anything above that puts you into profit.On any one betting run I am risking an average of 6% of my total betting bank. Do you understand that? So 12 wins to 1 loss, is definately well in the profit zone even if I never change the staking level. If you read my earlier posts you should know that I vary the staking level depending on how many times I win consecutively, and when I suffer a losing run. This type of money management maximizes the profits and minimizes the losses. And is the only way to go if you're serious about making good profits from any system. Level stakes will not work for any system in the long run. If either you or Seen2001 dis-agree. I welcome you to prove me wrong. By illustrating it in a working system. What I would like to ask both you and seen2001 is this. Do you actually believe any system can beat the bookmakers ? And if the answer is yes, how do you know it can ? I will repeat this system works on ALL 6 traps Danny, but its strike rate is superior for traps 3 & 4. I want the maximum strike rate in my system, that is the reason I now concentrate on traps 3 & 4. Do you now understand that? You also say I have given you no proof this system works. I have told people on here when four qualifiers occured this month and when they won. What more do I have to do ? you know my staking plan now so there are no excuses. When I tell you trap3 or 4 have qualified, all you have to do is follow their progress using my staking plan. Then you will see for yourself this system is making money. I can't make it any clearer than that. The question is can you be bothered ? Then if you take the time to follow the progress of the system after 6 month or so, you may start to actually believe this thing works. I can't do it all for you. For people as scepticle as yourself, the only thing thats going to change your opinion is to see this system working over a long period of time. Wouldn't you agree ? In 2004 trap 3 & 4 have qualified 33 times in my system and won 33 times. I know that's not good enough for you Danny you want to see it working in the future, so you'll have to follow it. A final question for you, how long will my system have to keep working for you to say "you know he may have something here" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Intensity Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested You also say I have given you no proof this system works. I have told people on here when four qualifiers occured this month and when they won. What more do I have to do ? Fucking hell. Fender, check out Systems & Strategies. Here's a link if you can't be arsed to look for it: b11.ezboard.com/fpuntersloungefrm18 There you will see people keeping a record of there systems/bets and other people can see if they are making a profit or a loss. That is what you have to do to gain any credibility :\ . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DannyCash Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested My head hurts, I think I've finally gone mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boytractor Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Comments whoneedsrio - what a sad person you are. I certainly don't want any worshippers. I came on here to give ideas that may or may not already be known. I don't give a damn about how much you make or loose. I look after number 1 and have done for many years. It seems that the majority just want others to give nothing but winners. In this game, you've got to put the work in to reap the rewards. No doubt you are one of the mugs who pay tipsters because your too idol to do your own work. One thing you obviously don't understand is that gambling is about LONG TERM profit. It seems to me that if a system / method doesn't deliver the goods on day one, you don't want to know and can't be bothered to follow it yourself if interested. Once again, you want someone to do all the work for you and then slag it off if unsuccessful. Mr Intensity. You are just a total waste of space with absolutely nothing to offer other than critiscism. Another loser in my book. I have no intention of continuing to proof anything. To me it's a total waste of my time. As I've said before, you do it your way, I'll do it mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ralphie7 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Comments for fcuks sake guys calm down. have until now played a watching part in all this but this forum is now getting like another ( no names ) just using the forum for a slagging match helps no one. all it will end up doing is............ 1 STOPPING PEOPLE FROM POSTING ON HERE 2 PUT OFF NEW POSTERS FOR FEAR OF BEING SLAGGED OFF at the end of the day we all want the same thing from this forum. to hit the camel coats where it hurts. if i was a newcomer on here i wouldn't come back who needs it ? life is too short believe me ? if you want to get rid of your aggression then get yourself to the gym and pump some weights. the ladies will agree with me here ;) so come on guys kiss and make up :lol before Punter Lounge is dragged down to the same level as the other forum ( no names ) ralphie :cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Intensity Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Comments I only come in this forum for this :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Comments Absolutely Boytractor. A lack of patience has been the downfall of many a punter. I myself try to achieve a monthly profit. But as long as I get a satisfying return over the course of the year I am more than happy. No system is a get rich quick scheme. If people want that. That is what the lottery is there for. But of course that is down to pure luck, a fluke or whatever way you want to term it. My system only throws up an average of 8 qualifiers per month. For many that simply isn't enough frequency. They are in a hurry to make loads of money. Unfortunately the lack of patience usually results in the opposite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Whodesio, I asked those questions and layed down a challenge to both Danny & Seen2001 to prove me wrong. It is easy to criticize what someone is doing, and believe long standing notions about what will and will not work. Danny & Seen2001 believe one, my system is based on pure luck and two. The staking plan I advise won't work because it is based on increasing the stake on a series of 7 bets. A loss recovery staking plan as Seen2001 calls it. In my experience I have never seen a staking plan that utilizes level stakes all the time make any profit worth talking about in the long run. So I am simply asking both Seen2001 & Danny cash to prove me wrong if they can. Also because of the obvious scepticism both of them have about betting systems, I asked them do they actually believe any system can beat the bookmakers. Because if they don't believe it in the first place, it is no wonder that they won't even consider the possibility that it can be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DannyCash Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Ok Fender, hear me out. It doesn't matter what I think about betting systems and whether they can beat the bookmaker because I am only concerned with your system and whether it will beat the bookmaker. I would be quite prepared to give you all the encouragement and praise you require if I could see logical reasoning and a clear, precise staking plan. I understand your selection method perfectly. Infact I will prove this by highlighting todays qualfiers and then if you don't mind I will ask you about your staking plan. Wednesday 21st April 11.28 HG Trap 1 5-1 11.34 BP Trap 1 3-1 11.41 HG Trap 4* 3-1 11.48 BP Trap 3 4-1 1.48 HO Trap 3 4-1 1.58 PB Trap 4* 5-1 2.08 HO Trap 4* 7-1 2.18 PB Trap 1 3-1 OK, so there's your 8 races. Now trap 4 won 3 times. So today doesn't count as a losing day. You are now going to wait 13 days until trap 4 doesn't win one of these particular 8 races. Your staking plan consisted of 3 'stages' totalling 21 separate bets. So, as I understand this, if, after 13 "day"s racing, and trap 4 is a no-show, you will bet on trap 4 for the next 7 days (each "day" consisting of 8 races) up to "day" 20. 7 days racing consists of 7 x 8 races which is 56 events. Here's the problem unless I have misunderstood: Your staking plan will only get you through 21 races before you have blown your bank of 120 units. So, if trap 4 doesn't win for 21 races which equates to two days and 5 races on the third day you will be in big trouble. You cannot guarantee a winner from trap 4 on ANY given day just because trap 4 hasn't won one of your 8 races on the previous 13 days. This is where I fail to see any logic to the system and the staking plan and this is where, I'm afraid to say, I will have to leave it. Sorry if I have offended you, and, as I said in my first post, I hope you prove me and the other doubters on this forum wrong. Danny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CJ Mars Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested I think you have misunderstood the stakeing / selection plan Danny. Each race is considered a seperate and discrete event i.e the 11.28 race should be considered on its own every day and so on. You have taken all the days races together. If the 11.28 won on the 1st of the month it would then become valid only on the 15th of the month if there had not been a win in the 11.28 during that period (assumeing I think racing at that time every day). I share your misgivings re the methdology. If I knew more about the dogs and what was and wasn't a qualifying race I would test this (still feel that with a reasonable amount of time that this should still be possible for someone). The problem here as well is that the sample size will be so small that any judgement will be very definiotive to give either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DannyCash Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Right so there's every opportunity of over-lapping lines? Therefore there will be occasions where you are chasing trap 4 using sperate banks. It gets worse.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Danny thankyou for your reply. But I can now see why you don't think my system can work. You've really got mixed up here. Firstly anytime trap 3 or 4 goes 13 days without winning in one of the 8 races I follow. I proceed to bet on that race only, for A MAXIMUM OF 7 BETS. DAY 14 THROUGH DAY 20. There is no chance of me wiping out my betting bank as you keep insisting, because each 7 bets make up an average of 6% OF MY total bank. So I would have to lose 16 x 7 betting runs in a row to go bankrupt. Something that is impossible to happen. This system only averages 8 qualifiers per month. So although it is possible to have two or three simultaneous qualifiers it works out beautifully. Especially if you've two trap 3'S OR 4'S in consecutive races qualified at the same time. It is the closest thing to gauranteed that you can get in betting. That at least 1 of those two will win. And highly lightly that they will both win. If you want to see an example of this, go to the new thread I started called The Timeline system in ACTION. Three trap 4's in the 11.26am, the 11.34am & the 11.41am all qualified within 3 days of each other. That was a dream situation for me. As I knew I was going to win with at least two of them. I know you think I am a cocky bastard Danny. But believe me it's hard to be humble when you see this system working as well as it does. Time will show it to all of you. If your still not clear on anything, please ask. Kindest regards Fender... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest whoneedsrio Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Comments BT quotes, "It seems that the majority just want others to give nothing but winners. In this game, you've got to put the work in to reap the rewards. No doubt you are one of the mugs who pay tipsters because your too IDOL to do your own work." I almost split my sides when I read this, the dictionary defines idol as "an image of a deity as an object of worship; a false god; object of excessive devotion, it would have been even funnier if I'd thought you meant to spell it like that. As for putting the work in I'll come back to what I do in my IDLE moments shortly. "One thing you obviously don't understand is that gambling is about LONG TERM profit." Your going down the same road as Fender here, he knows nothing about Danny, you know sod all about me. And so to the work. Just to clear something up first, in the early days of your 4x4x4x4 posts I got the impression that you and even more so ralphie thought I was having a pop at you, indeed he asked for you to be given a chance and I think you were. I can assure you I was not having a go at that time, this form of betting is in my methods now and as been for many years but not trying for fourtimers and not with 256 bets. At the time I thought you were overegging the pudding and I hoped to open a discussion and maybe exchange a few thoughts. However you stopped posting this system but not before telling us it was not your real betting method and that you'd had two nice wins in Cheltenham week, but not posted beforehand. At this point I decided not to bother posting re the 4x4x4x4 method. This does not mean however that I had not been doing my homework, now I'll take a guess at your methods. For jump racing your ideal qualifing race would be a handicap chase for preference but handicap hurdles may also be considered along with the odd novice chase. For aw flat racing the prefered medium is all aged handicaps with the odd claimer or 3yo only handicap thrown in if needed. Under both codes the ideal number of runners should be between 8 and 12 if posible but it can go a little higher. From the first post on 4th Feb to the last on 26th Mar you had a total of 112 races in your bets, I have included the races left from the two bets you voided due to meetings called off as I'm interested in the selections only. From this 112 races you trapped the winner in the four choices per race 66 times ( 59% ) this is what interests me. I have a method of field reduction of my own and the results are not dissimilar to mine. The average SP of these winners by the way was 4.71/1. I then decided to take a look in the Massey site where your selections come from and found that he has five years worth of his ratings on there and I thought I'd do a spot of research. Because the new season of flat racing is upon us I decided to see how the top four rated had fared in all aged handicaps ( 3yo+ ) 8 to 12 runners during the month of May from 99 to 03. Last year there were 24 winners from 42 races ( 57% ) working backwards to 99 gives, 22 from 34 ( 64% ) 24 from 39 ( 61% ) 22 from 40 ( 55% ) and 44 from 72 ( 61% ) this is most consistent. Again working backwards the average SP's are, 3.36/1, 5.03/1, 4.4/1, 6.39/1 and 3.95/1. So what do we have? There is much more work to do but it seems we may have a method which reduces fields of 8 to 12 runner handicaps to a more manageable four, trapping the winner around 60% of the time. With further, say more usual form study these four can be reduced down to provide single bets or two or three per race for multiple betting, it is easier to study a four runner race than one with 8 or 12. What I was going to do was test this live this May, posting before race times whilst looking into the rest of the results on the Massey site to check its ongoing viability, perhaps this may interest you? Whatever I suggest we now call a truce. Rio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boytractor Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Comments whoneedsrio - you are a gentleman. If I have upset you in any way, I apologise. I'm more than happy to call a truce. Unfortunately, I am going to be away from a pc for a couple of days as of tomorrow morning (my father is seriously ill so I'm going to stay with him - it may be my last chance!). Once back, I would very much like to exchange views on multiple accumulator type betting and will certainly re-read your post. I would also just like to point out that I that I am currently making a living from gambling and hope to continue rather than look for another contract. My main income at present is from the dogs - sorry but that is the reason I am backing Fender. Please give him a chance as I seriously think he is onto something. Who knows, between us we may even be able to tweak it further. I know nothing is guaranteed - perhaps he misused the word. I would also add that as far as I'm aware, I don't know anyone on here. If I've offended anyone else, I also apologise to them. Good luck Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lufc Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested Hope your father gets well soon BT, good luck with it :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Comments Rio, I never said I knew anything about Danny. I had to ask questions in order to find out what his stance is concerning betting systems and so forth. We are all passionate about whatever system we believe in. I appear to be over confident/arrogant however you want to view my attitude on here. I appreciate the need for people to see the on-going success of my Timeline system, in order for them to understand my enthusiasm and solid confidence in its performance. And for that reason I have started another thread where I will document every qualifier and its results in my system from now on. I do agree there is no need for people to fall out on here over our individual beliefs on the merits of one way of thinking over another regarding whether a system really can beat the bookmakers. I hope to change peoples minds on here over the coming years. And make people see what is possible when you study the nature of the long losing run. And realize that it can be fashioned into a workable & profitable system... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest juninho fan Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Bobbins... It has been brought to my attention that there is a new genius greyhound tipster on the forum, and that I must follow his tips to ensure guaranteed profit. As a lover of both greyhounds and the sport of greyhound racing, I must add my tuppence worth. If is is uncalled for then so be it, but I think I have an explanation for why this will NOT work. 1) Surely each individual greyhound race is a puzzle in its own right, and just because one trap has not won in its certain "trap alocation block" it doesn't mean it is MORE LIKELY to win next race/time out. I have studied dog form and, most importantly IMO, dog times, for 5 years, so what if your selections end up being the slowest dog in each race? I have notices and recorded that over the course of time, the slowest dog in each race only wins 6% of the time, so what if you were unlucky enough for one of your selections to fall into this category 7 times in a row? :cry 2) Why is a trap number MORE likely to win if it hasn't won last time out? SPEED and the DRAW are the two key elements in analysing each greyhound race AS AN INDEPENDENT BETTING MEDIUM and therefore, blindly shoving trap 4 in where trap 2 clearly has the fastest times, and trap 6 is the fastest breaker with a short run to the bend is neither helpful, strategic, well thought out out or inspiring. You should have an understanding of FORM and not trap numbers to make this game pay. Prove this works, and we'll believe you. If you want some win selections purely based on my understanding of the sport, I'll happily put them up and see if they work level stakes. Not many people seem to understand your staking plan. If one of your times lines has not come in for 13 races, you continue to chase that time line, but what if you have two or even three time lines not coming in collectively? You must be able to cope with this scenario, not just one 'failed' time line... This so called system leaves too much to the imagination and not enough to the bare facts of the sport. 45% of the fastest two dogs in each race WIN their races, 66% of the fastest breakers WIN their races, and as I mentioned before - over time, only a measly 6% of the SLOWEST dog wins its races. You could end up with any number of these characteristics, therefore NOT GUARANTEEING PROFIT. See ya... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Intensity Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Bobbins... 1) Surely each individual greyhound race is a puzzle in its own right, and just because one trap has not won in its certain "trap alocation block" it doesn't mean it is MORE LIKELY to win next race/time out. each greyhound race AS AN INDEPENDENT BETTING MEDIUM I've been saying this all along :sad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Comments Boytractor I am sorry to hear about your father, I hope he pulls through. I have to give you respect for the way you came back to Rio. And you're where I hope to be by the end of this year with my system. Sustaining a living. I believe I can do it too, once I reach the level necessary. I also do get over enthusiastic about my system and use the word gauranteed. I will try to become more humble, and let the results speak for themselves. And you may be right maybe we can make a good thing even better. Speak to you soon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lufc Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested The chance of backing the slowest greyhound in each race is almost 300,000/1 (279936/1) so the chances of getting that 6% dog repeating itself for one run of the system is virtually impossible let alone each qualifying run. You must remember the two traps are random dogs each time, this is the reason the system works so well. There will be a mixture of the types of running dogs placed in the trap in each of the 7 meetings (if they get to that). So basically you will have fast breakers/fastest dogs/slow runners in the traps over the run of the system, chances seem much higher of a victory in those 7 days now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Intensity Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Timeline (Greyhounds) System Tested There will be a mixture of the types of running dogs placed in the trap in each of the 7 meetings (if they get to that). So basically you will have fast breakers/fastest dogs/slow runners in the traps over the run of the system, chances seem much higher of a victory in those 7 days now? Exactly. You summed it up perfectly. This is totally based on randomness and luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fender2004 Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 Re: Bobbins... If you're referring to me Juninho fan, I am no genius. Even if you're taking the rise. Listen regarding my system, I don't have all the answers. All I can say is it has worked consistently for me for nearly 9 months now. And in my total research it has worked for 4.3 years. Like I have mentioned before I truly believe one of the major reasons my system works for greyhounds is the set number of 6 possible outcomes. I wouldn't dream of attempting to find the common losing limit for say roulette or horse racing. Because there are too many possible outcomes to overcome. A roulette wheel has 37 possible outcomes. And horseracing has uneven possibilities. You can have 2 runners in one race and 22 in the next. There is no set criteria to work with, like there is for greyhound racing. And that set factor is 6. A manageable number of outcomes. I think this is the important factor you have to bare in mind before you start to give your reasons for not believing my system works. If you can understand my point maybe you can see why it's possible to identify a zone in the long losing run where the vast majority of long losing runs come to rest for the middle two traps. Trap 3 & Trap 4. I am only concerned about this re-occuring situation. I never have any Idea what dog is running in trap 3 or 4. Or its previous stats. Only how those two traps perform between day 14 & day 20 of my system. And all I can say is the performance is very impressive. An average of 12 losing runs finish their life in that 7 day gap, for every 1 losing run that goes beyond the 20th day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest juninho fan Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 TO lufc... There is no GUARANTEE that your RANDOM/BLIND 8) selection will be the fastest trapper or fastest dog or luckiest dog in the race. You guys(lufc/Fenderstratocaster/Boytractor4x4x4x4) make me laugh, you're willing to pump hundreds if not thousands of pounds onto a trap number, A TRAP NUMBER!!!!, just because it hasn't won a race the day before at the same time! Potentially you could end up having a week's wages riding on a dog that is the slowest in the race and has no trapping ability whatsoever!! WOULD YOU BE CONFIDENT? :eek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.