I stand by the two selections for today, Day 1. 3pm and 4pm if favourite at the off. Hunting Ground and Ivy port. both 1 point stake. Both need to be at least 0.75 gap from the 2nd fav. NO BET HUNTING GROUND - 4/6. IVY PORT 4/1 2nd Fav. An additional selection for me today which will need to be the second favourite, 2.40 Wincanton. Bennys Mist. If at the off Bennys Mist is within 0.25 of the favourite, ie, 9/4 - 5/2 and so forth then this is also a bet. BENNYS MIST WON 5/2 On the off SP read 9/4 - 5/2 and the result was called at those odds (RUK on CORALS.CO.UK) and then amended that they returned JF, but if you followed the selection it would have been placed as the 2nd Fav. NOT counting this as a winning selection as only watching Coral.co.uk. NO BETS TODAY.
Ok, give me odds on the system going to a pay for website if it proves to be profitable? I could do with topping my funds for the year. If the chap had joined in with conversations on other threads, etc, I would be less sarcastic, but really what do you expect?
Nassau, has the steward forgot to put the tonic in your mid-morning GnT?!? Must ask though why Evens?!? Why not 10/11 or 11/10 for instance. And why on earth must the selection be favourite?!? Also, is this a level stakes system?!? If this isn’t made clear at the outset I’m sure it will lead, further down the line, to the ‘usual’ occurrence in these instances of the author claiming to have 1 pt on all losers and 100 pts on all winners!
Hi, After a few conversations with Ron etc, he told me to give it a go, I had nothing all week until today. Not sure whats the "obvious" but these are my selections. I look at many threads with interest and thats why I joined. Maybe your reasons differ but I really do enjoy racing and lets be honest we all enjoy selecting winners.
To Sir Barney, the minimum odds are evens, can be 4/1 if favourite. But must be favourite. No Odds-On. All selections are 1 point. No variable stakes for me. Mate, these are the first two I have put up, they have not even ran yet and getting hammered. On the basis of what i work to, they have to be favourite. That it.
But you aren't selecting winners, you are using a predefined set of rules to suggest that you can produce a profit on the preposition of your rulebase. Unfortunately, life in general, and sport in the main, cannot be predicted by using a rulebase, otherwise West Ham would not have drawn with Chelsea last night, Auroras Encore wouldn't have won the GN, and we wouldn't have witnessed the greatest return to form in the Americas Cup. Life, Racing and everything else has an element of randomness, or chaos if you will. As for enjoying racing, see you at Cheltenham, Wincanton, Newbury, Taunton or Sandown in the next month and a half. Remember to add tonic to my GnT though, and make sure you only bet if its the favourite!!
OK, fair enough. I’m not having a go incidentally, far from it, just trying to understand the system better. Personally, the ‘must be favourite’ stance is very baffling from my personal perspective for a number of reasons. The most obvious being (i) why would you bet the same horse if its 100/30 favourite but not 7/2 second choice of the market, (ii) the system doesn’t seem to account for personal ‘value’ perspectives – why would you back a horse you felt should be 4/1 but goes off say 11/8 favourite, and (iii) in ultimately choosing the choice of the market you are having 0% say in who you back and are simply leaving it to others to decide for you. Still good luck with it and I hope it delivers the goods. Final question from me though is it still a bet if the horse is joint favourite or even co-favourite???
A selection where rules you have created are to applied, then in my case the preposition is it must be the market favourite, then the obvious answer is the selection is good to go as long as the market agrees with me. I live in Marbella so will be watching racing from my TV. maybe a spell in the sun might just make your G&T easier to sip and help the ice to melt a little!
To Sir B, just to answer, over the last 4 years the basis of my selections have been I apply 9 formulas, all based from understanding a pattern. These work with strict rules attached. The idea is to forget luck and guess work and let the formula work instead. I do also select second favourites but under a strict rule again. I am not looking to prove anything here only to establish if anyone agrees with the way I select as a good workable and profitable system. I have averaged over the period 55% strike and around 80% ROI. The question of odds are all my selections can be any price between evens up to 4/1. They cannot be joint or co-fav, There must be a gap of 0.75 point to the second favourite. Whatever price they are at the off is SP, so long as they fall in the rules. Finally, Q3, I had 100% say in the selection, the bet only occurs right at the last moment to ensure the rules fit. Thanks.
Nine formulas and it doesn't include the lines "don't bet on 60 rated horses who beat a field of trees last time out", the three horses behind him lto have cumulative ages of 28!!! I wish you well with your bets, but I love the irony of you telling us your strike rate and ROI, if you were doing so well, why would you bother sharing the bets?
I can see the reason for favourite Barney because it's a system and a system must have rules in place for a selection to qualify and if Mark has defined that as a rule then he has to be allowed apply it. Whilst I am with you Barney in that if you fancy a horse then it's price or position in the market is neither here nor there, within user defined system any rule goes. I responded last week to Mark's initial thread with exactly some of the sentiments expressed that a mathematical system is impossible and one not mathematical offers no guarantee of the following day or year regardless of if it had produced a profit ten days previously. What Mark really has is not so much a mathematical system but a collection of factors he personally uses to identify a betting proposition. What he uses may make him more or less successful than the one used by you and I but its only a collection of factors he uses. The point is he has come on without abusing anyone or making ludicrous claims and basically wants to join in, if his system is rubbish then he will stop posting it anyway, if he starts to show decent and consistent profits he will rightly find many plaudits here and if as has been quite reasonably suggested he is only looking to cultivate future customers for some dull system then quite rightly he will be shown the door with advice of where to stick his system ringing in his ear. Until then there is no harm if we presume he is a genuine and sincere man until he proves otherwise. Barney we could also agree to pass on our systems to Mark although I am not sure how impressed he will be with the maths of either of back the Henderson horse or mine of Back Jim Crowleys mount.
I did. cannot use all the usual online bookies and Betfair will not operate from here, so going back home shortly.
I was writing my post whilst the last two were listed - I might have to withdraw the bit about not making ludicrous claims as a 55% strike rate and 80% ROI is bordering on the ludicrous. After all the talk of last week Mark it's clearly time to let your selections speak for you and you have indeed posted some up today, good luck.
Well thats the fun of all this, what maybe considered ludicrous that turns out to be factual, then there it is, proof in the pudding. I agree. And thanks.
Look fellas. we were happy for Ardent to post his system selections and he didn't even give us a clue as to how his system worked. As long as Mark posts his selections up front (as he has) together with the conditions to be applied before the off, let's see how it goes. Just to be clear. 1. Mark determines his provisional selections (using his formulae) and posts before the off 2. As soon as the SP is established (when is this?) the following conditions are applied before placing a 1 point win bet. The selection must be (based on SP): clear favourite by at least 0.75 point not odds on no greater than 4/1 The only confusing bit is the statement highlighted in Mark's post above. Perhaps you could clarify Mark.
Looking at Hunting Ground: currently quoted at odds on carrying a 6lb penalty won last time out market move for Masterful Act who also won last time out, is not carrying a penalty and is top weight.
Wrong, the SP on the off will be the price it returns. If it differs then this is because of a time lag only, very rare.
