"X"
 

I've said many times that finding a "profitable system" is the easy part ..... and it is too. These systems I post are to give an "indication" to the many on here who don't have a database (those who prefer milk and bread eh ?? lol .... ) of what filters MAY work in combination. My opinion is that you need to show a (hypothetical) 50% POT to ride the ups and downs of horse racing.

This system passes "muster" because it's profitable in both NSW and Vic.

Seln's 2,398
Winners 376
POT 15.7%

TAB 1 to 6 (DD should love this one)
Race distance > 1200m
Weight >+1 kg (so it's going down in class and up in weight which is better than up in class and down in weight ..... so the experts say. I don't believe this to be true)
Days break 4 to 6
SP $4 to $15 (it's in the market)

..... note so far, we haven't delved into the individual horses form (LSW, "c" etc), which I believe gives a system more chance of repeating !!

5 filters .....

Add a couple of filters and this can be well over 50% POT ..... hypothetical of course !!

Are you talking about 50 % on TO for 1 bet or 1 race as it has never been possible by anyone EVER in the long history of Horse betting to achieve 50% on TO over the long term.

7 - 15 % is possible if your one of the Top Flight bettors in Australia .

I leave the 50 % on TO figures to the imagination of the sharks,conmen and system sellers who abound in the industry.
Their good for a giggle though.

Cheers.

Darkydog2002, you cannot prove your statement, and to say "it has never been possible by anyone EVER in the long history .... blah, blah" is nothing more than your opinion. I have posted what is factual as far as my database goes, and further "logical" filtering gives me, as I've said in my original post, a HYPOTHETICAL POT well in excess of 50%. I can prove this ..... You cannot prove your assertion. Nice to see moeee has sent on the 19th man in his abscence tho', good for a larff.

What would you say is the suggested min sample size over which to prove that the 50% POT is sustainable?

LG

Geez Darkydog2002, you used to go into absolute raptures everytime bhagwan posted on of his systems ..... and he had many that showed POT's of well over 100%. You even nominated him for system of the year !!

At least be consistent.

For what it's worth, the systems that I could test of bhagwan's, I couldn't get close to a POT, let alone the one's over 100%. You're a bit like moeee, you criticise, yet you haven't got the resources to back your criticisms up (called facts !) ..... so they're just opinions Darkydog2002.

I think your meaning Return On Investment rather than Profit On Turnover.

2 Completely different things.

ROI is for a individual horse or race.

POT is long term over a year or many years.

Many people get mixed up with these 2 definitions.

Cheers
darky

No comment for you LG ..... I'm on ignore remember ?

Please explain in more detail Darkydog2002.

Example:
You start the year with a $100 bank. At the end of the year your bank is $200, so you've made $100 profit.

Your ROI is 100%.

To make the $100 profit, you turned your bank over 10 times ($1000).

Your POT is 10%.

You have been TOUd for this post. Strong personal abuse of Forum Members is not acceptable here. You have been suspended for two weeks. Moderator.

Well explained The Schmille.
Thanks.

Barny
I don't know the history but you don't have to reply to your critics. Let your ideas speak for themselves and simply choose to ignore any criticism. You may be surprised how well that works.

When your suspenders come off- hope you wear a belt.
 

Barney- weight does make a difference-Melb Cup top weights for instance- but with racing it always about price and the horses rising in weight should be in their class-But do they get out to prices just that little bit longer than they should because they have the extra weight – The other thing is I read some where 1 in a thousand race horses will win a metro race this does not mean don’t bet metro but sometimes I wonder – there are about 10 horses in every race so 90% of horses get beaten in every race- so how many get beaten going up in class doesn’t matter if you don’t know the other corresponding stats -but if these horses are under the odds on a consistent basis you may as well elimate them.

So any way how did the horses go down in weight with the same rules if you can when you get your suspenders back.

Just an idea
 

Hi Barney I also wonder does good dead – slow heavy make any difference as I have always thought wet tracks make a big difference with lighter weighted horses and with the 1 to 6 tab nos should work better on good to dead mainly due to higher weights don’t know and I am just guessing –Then also these horses have extra weight 1 kg plus so it would make an interesting test ??

To those who've implied I'm a spiv, conman, to those who've suggested I have an ulterior motive for posting some systems (ie; I'm in it to sell them), and those who "wait to pounce" ..... well you've won. It's impossible to post any systems on here given the negativity and the need by some to put others down. I find it strange because it appears that these posters who argue against data, don't in fact have any database of their own in which they could prove their assertions. Also the "wating to pounce" where the continued queries and put downs include "how many selections?", and this poster was quite happy with the Melbourne Cup system, which, if I'm not mistaken, only comes around once per year ??, not too many races there ?! I don't mind an argument about concepts, it opens the mind, but to gang up (which you've done) one a poster who is putting up systems is naturally going to eventually have that poster stop.

It's a pity because I had come to realise that "If you wrote the best system in the world in chalk outside Randwick, no-one would take any notice of it", has a lot of truth in it, and I was starting to get to the stage where I would be happy posting my systems with a POT of well over 50%, and also some of my "dividend friendly" filters.

you little tease :P

I'm back from my wonderful trip to Flemington which is one week to experience. Barny, I do agree that at times it may feel your being ambushed by members opinions that at the end of the day it doesn't mean yah or nah....

How many explorers back in the day believed the world to be flat and don't sail off the edge only to be wrong. I'm a strong believer in not to follow the crowd and do your own testing on everything and develop your own theories.

Your ideas and comments bring debate to the table and personally allows me to gather some fresh thoughts into my own practises.

i'd love to see some of the systems that show a pot of >50%. have any of these been posted on here before? i've seen systems on here with big profits but i cant check them. please post some barny. we all get frustrated at times, it's no biggie.

It's so easy to put someone you don't like on Ignore. When logged in I just click User CP at top left. Then the Buddy/Ignore Lists link. Then I add the member's name in the Ignore List and click the Update Ignore List button.

I never see any post from that person. Makes life here much more enjoyable for me.

shifty, there are two things I've learned as an atom in the cosmos of thoroughbred racing, 1) Almost all punters win, they'll tell you that and, 2) There's an element called luck, that so far, no matter what research has been undertaken, is somewhere in the "black hole" and is the undoing of all great men.

ps; luv the nic

Good to see you back Barny!

Yes, welcome back again Barny.

I'd like to ask you a few questions about your database as I'm thinking of taking the plunge and you're an independent consumer. Have you got an email address I can contact you at or could you drop me a line at

charleyfarleyok at gmail dot com

Thanks Peter

peter m, ask away on here and I'll answer honestly. Otherwise you could ask chrome prince as I'm sure he's the one who "sells" the database. Whatever you're told about the database will be true. It's everything I expected. It's not much of a plunge really and what it did for me was to curtail my betting, not that I went mad previously, and I now concentrate on a few systems that continue to perform and I punt heavily on them. I'm happy to wait for weeks for the right bet to come up.

O.k Barny, thanks for the offer.

Does the database have enough info about Provincial and Country racing so it would be possible to formulate a system that has a higher turnover and works say 7 days a week. Or is the database only geared to Saturday racing?

Does it throw up a set of ratings or a list of top 3 or 4 rated horses per race or is it just able to test mechanical filters?

Does it work with or include TAB prices?

I have some figures I've got from various sources, don't know how accurate they are but along the lines of, for example. 90% of all winners finished 6 lengths or less from the winner last start, that kind of thing.
Was wondering if it's possible to crunch numbers so a list of these kind of statistics could be made with accuracy?

Lastly, the big one. I'm assuming that you looked into a few options and was wondering why you picked this particular database as opposed to Neale Yardley's BetSelector or TRB's GTX and how they compare to each other?

I suppose you can tell from the questions that I'm not the most experienced at this punting caper but that's why I need to ask.

Hope you can enlighten me a bit more re the database and the reasons you chose this particular one

Thanks,
Pete

Does the database have enough info about Provincial and Country racing so it would be possible to formulate a system that has a higher turnover and works say 7 days a week. Or is the database only geared to Saturday racing? - 7 days a week with full records

Does it throw up a set of ratings or a list of top 3 or 4 rated horses per race or is it just able to test mechanical filters? -- Only mechanical filters, no ratings

Does it work with or include TAB prices? - Unitab

I have some figures I've got from various sources, don't know how accurate they are but along the lines of, for example. 90% of all winners finished 6 lengths or less from the winner last start, that kind of thing.
Was wondering if it's possible to crunch numbers so a list of these kind of statistics could be made with accuracy? - Yup, lengths from the winner is there as a filter

Lastly, the big one. I'm assuming that you looked into a few options and was wondering why you picked this particular database as opposed to Neale Yardley's BetSelector or TRB's GTX and how they compare to each other? - Didn't look at any other options.

I suppose you can tell from the questions that I'm not the most experienced at this punting caper but that's why I need to ask.

Hope you can enlighten me a bit more re the database and the reasons you chose this particular one - I read about it on here in the forum and decided to get it. $400, you can't go tooo far wrong. It's got a huge amount of filters, too many to list. I think you might need to ask someone at propun, the contact name is there somewhere, and they could answer your questions. There's an ad for this system soemwhere on here.

Thanks for the answers Barny. Yes, I suppose for $400 you can't go far wrong and it's not going to break the bank.
The reason I thought to ask you is that you're an independent consumer with a lot of punting nouse.
So, has this database helped you generate any profitable systems of your own and/or helped turn you into a profitable punter by adding to your punting knowledge by knowing what statistics, punting adages, maxims and fokelore are true or false?

Thanks.
Peter

I look forward to Barny's reply

I've been using Bet Selector for 3 years now.

When I first started using the program I didn't believe the concepts of backfitting etc.... and continued to make losses each month. You get excited when you play with the 50+ variables available to still get the same end results as you tend to develop systems with 50% POT and expect this to continue.

Over the years I have been able to read this forum and generate my own systems with the use of developing different filters. Bet Selector has 3 ratings built in which still produce long-term losses on their own.

There is another element of the program which allows you to create points system on different fitlers and lots of other little functions like differences between stats etc....

The program can do lots of things but at the end of the day you still need to be able to find a competitive edge to the others using the program. Since using the program from October 2012 onwards I have only started to making slight gains each week. The database allows you see the bookies price on course and also has a TAB live function to update the selections after scrs to get your selections. PPFA is an add on which gives a more accurate base rating then Bet selector on its own. By buying the product now you get data going back to October 2007 but their are ways to get information going back to 2000 through another supplier.

Live updates cost $55 per month and the software I think its aorund $350.00

Could be time to 'Unleash The Beast'!;)

On a serious note Barny, does the program have a charting option? eg to be able to chart a systems returns over time?

I'd better not be answering too many questions because there might be functions that I simply haven't come across. Ask the developer.

I'd better not be answering too many questions because there might be functions that I simply haven't come across. Ask the developer.

O.k Barny, thanks for answering the questions you did . Thanks Vortech for the rundown on the Bet Selector program as well.

I suppose it's a a bit of a conundrum that the more people that use these databases the more the info becomes commonplace and you're competing against each other to find an edge, info being, it seems, the key commodity to turning a quid

Hi Peter,
I'm the developer of the database.
If you have any questions, either ask here or feel free to email me at racestats at hotmail.com. I'll answer any queries you have with no obligation to buy.

Briefly, it is a system tester with closing TAB prices and dividends.
While there are no ratings in the database, perhaps it's best attribute is highlighting what doesn't work, saving many wasted bets.

I disagree, there's far too many combinations of filters for the marketplace to be overwhelmed and hence the horse to be well under the odds as a result. Also, punters, being mugs have made the same mistakes since the year dot, and will continue to do so. CP statement that it's best attribute is highlighting what doesn't work, is exactly what I've found too.

I have found a nice few systems, with few bets, that are not all purely mechanical because 1) they give a horse a run or two after being selected (and this incorporates one of Don Scott's major axioms (as I've interpreted it)) and 2) I look for horses from NZ, o'seas (& up to 3 preps here) with a few filters to get rid of those targetting Melb Cup for instance, and interstate horses.

So, the database can be used in conjunction with any method of selection.

And they don't continue do they Vortech ?? ..... Some do tho'. If they've been consistent over 10+ years, been consistent in every state when conditions are right (class of race), even though the bets are few if the logic is there, they'll continue to perform.

If the rules are not backfittered and there is some logic they probably can continue.

No reason why a system with a 50% POT with 1-2 bets per week can't make profit in theory.
At the same time a 10% POT with 30 bets per week making profit can also continue.

This is up to the individual and neither approach is right or wrong.

Vortech, I'm glad you're posting. I like a debate on theory. I don't see anything wrong with "backfitting", whatever it's called, massaging filters to suit an outcome ..... because if it's over a long enough period then the correct / decent / profitable filters will eventually be isolated. I actually / niavely believe that you can have the most stooopid of filters in there for starters, and time will eliminate them as having any influence in finding a decent S/R / healthy div. I've tested systems that work in Vic and don't work in NSW, this is a common occurance, and wierd too. I've concluded that the handicapping class systems between the states contributes to the vast difference in results. Who knows ?? ..... I know I don't on this issue. Any thoughts Vortech ??

A couple of my good systems, (the ones that don't win 'coz I'm confused about POT & ROI, cannot win, won't hold up, have too few selections etc) are based on lightly raced horses. One selection method I have which isn't a mechanical system, and which I've posted on here, is based around lightly raced horses. I've read a lot of Don Scott in recent times, and one of his maxims (my choice of words) is to bet heavily on lightly raced horses, obviously other conditions being met, but he did say just that. I find this encouraging, as it has been after the development of my selection methods that I've encountered his writings. Sort of encourages me enough to know I'm in the right territory having confirmed that DS thought the same 30 years ago, adds a bit of longetivity to the concept. Also a few posts on here regarding the number of selections (sampling etc) have been encouraging too, not that I needed any confirmation in this area.

Do me a favour Vortech. Go to one of your 10% POT systems and slooooowly flick through the results in chronological order. If you don't get the heebie jeebies at the runs of outs between winners I'll be Santa at the Propun Xmas shindig. And you're going to be putting real moolah into this too. Ya need balls of steel in this caper. It's easy enough reading bhagwans stats regarding runs of outs, but it's a whole different ball game when there's real cash on the table. It's like standing over a two foot putt when you've got the yips ..... :)

I'll have a think about your comments and review tonight.

I'm not quite yet convinced that the time principle is enough to have confidence over a system if you don't yet have enough bets. Would be interested to see how your 50% POT systems go in the calender 2013 year.

Are you expecting your systems to continue at 50%POT?

I suppose my betting style is around having minimal ups and downs with profit margins each day. This doesn't excite most punters.

One comment I did hear in the media was around the success of 3yr old horses racing in open class against the older horses in the country with wins and then coming to the city to race against horses of the same age.

PS: Those putts just might get a little harder with the removal of the long-putter

[QUOTE=Barny]Vortech, I'm glad you're posting. I like a debate on theory. I don't see anything wrong with "backfitting", whatever it's called, massaging filters to suit an outcome ..... because if it's over a long enough period then the correct / decent / profitable filters will eventually be isolated.


If you have a system which shows a profit over 12 years of the following

Horses with TAB 2, 4 and 7
Brisbane races over 1050m
Saturday only
Good track
Field size of 14

Over 12 years showed a profit of 53%POT

Would this continue?