Some time ago I noticed that very seldom in hurdles does an outsider win and that they normally finish the proverbial mile from the winner. I assume because of the extreme rigour of the race that only the better and stronger horses win which is reflected in the market.

So I decided to test a Lay system (easier than backing the fancied horses) on the U.K. hurdles/chases. The rules are - they are general because on a few occasions I have relied on my opinion.

1) Minimum of 9 runners.
2) No maiden hurdles.
3) Selection to be between aprox $50 and $150 in the lay market.
4) Unplaced last three starts.
5) Only one selection per race.

It is a very dangerous method. Last night I had 5 bets which brought the total selections to 304. I wanted enough races to double the max bet of $150 to see if there was any merit in the system. Fortunately there have been no accidents, and needless to say my account has increased considerably.

Maybe I have just been lucky?

Hi Micheal,

What is your max. liability if a lay selection wins - $150 ?.

The max bet I have had so far is 5 Pounds sterling = approx $12.30. I can't remember what the liability was but I don't have a max liability, just strong praying. However, the vast majority of the bets have been horses with a Lay price of under $100.

I have also been using the method here in OZ but have not kept any records because there haven't been too many races. Interestingly, none of the selections here have even ran a Place.

If anyone's interested I hope to list tonight's bets later.

I would be betting to liability , more profit to be had on the shorter payers.

__________________
Cheers.

Well I think it is possible to get very unlucky with your type of bet.

The Betfair Users guide quotes the case of every horse in a UK hurdle race falling - think a five horse field.

The first horse (coincidently the favourite) was legally remounted, completed the course and declared the winner.

Unfortunately one punter had laid it in running at 1000/1 after it fell.

I think you will get a very high strike rate and I guess if you don't go over 150/1 you may get a long run before your hit..............

But I've found with doing unportected lays you will eventually get hit - and your bank suffer accordingly.

That is why others have advocated a staking method of betting to a maximum liability with multiple selections.

My major concern is horses falling, but my selection having little chance in this type of race would more or less eliminate most of the donkeys from winning. And with a minimum of 9 starters it would not be expected for all, or most, of the better runners falling or being incovenienced.

Bhagwan, that's true but in the same way the chance of them winning the race is greater than the bigger outsiders. I suppose its a double edged sword, and I would prefer to win less than lose more overall. One of the main posters on this forum researched staking plans for lay betting and said betting in units outperformed other plans. I also have looked at this with some of my lay methods and have come to the same conclusion.

Hopefully the good luck will continue.

Only one bet today:

04.40 - Senor Christie layed at $70.

Reckless, that is an amusing incident in the Betfair Users guide but not for the poor person who layed it at $1,000. That was an in-running bet which does not apply to my system, and someone could humourously say that even when the fave falls it can then get up and win the race.

If anyone's got a Unitab data base is it possible to look at Hurdles and see how betting the top 3 faves (or horses that started at $10 and less) have fared?

Last night's sole selection was beaten. I must admit that with 306 successive "smiles" one can easily become somewhat overconfident.