If the old system/selection method of backing a last start winner if it starts again inside 7 days is profitable, the opposite may well be true too.

ie: Lay a last start winner if it has not started within, say, 28 days.

The reasoning being that if a horse is going well then the connections would start it sooner than 28 days from a win.
If it has not started for >=28 days it may have had a setback of some sort which would also make it a risk.

Can one of the database gurus run it through for me please.
Also maybe 14 days, 21 days etc.
A thousand thankyou's in advance, jose.

__________________
Jose'.

Backing a last start winner if it starts again within 7 days is *guaranteed* to produce a long term loss; if that's the only criteria for the selection. It's simply impossible to win, long term, this way.

There's no easy way to permanently make a genuine profit from backing horses. The tiny, tiny amount of successful, professional punters ALL work unbeliveably hard and diligently year in and year out in order to produce several percent profit on turnover. Any other approach is just pure gambling and in this day and age will definitely not produce *genuine and permanent* earnings.


Successfully making money on the punt is a complex and difficult career path.

I think the hobbyist though has an extremely hard time accepting and believing that. There's probably thousands and thousands of hobbyist punters all over Australia who believe they can achieve a *genuine* profit. They'll look at their great results from last week/month/year and be convinced. Good luck to 'em; I guess everybody needs hope in their lives.

The mathematics of gambling on horses is based around the fact that virtually everyone (except a knowledgable professional) MUST lose eventually. The government and TAB's are guaranteed their profit for obvious reasons, and the bookie will ALWAYS win unless he *gambles*...... so the loser MUST be the punter. That's the facts of life.

I hate to put a dampner on your hopes, but laying horses in the manner you desire will also not provide a window to a genuine, permanent profit.

It's harsh I know, but it's the truth.

Stop frightening us Mr.Guitar Jimmy , I know we can all win , I just know it.

Jokes aside , punting to lay horses can be a very risky business .
Because one is dealing with prices similar to place betting & we all know what that feels like , its like trying to paint ice hoping we dont become unstuck.
In lay betting for those who dont already know , the biggest profit is finding short priced horses that we fell will fall over, the shorter the Favs price for the win the greater the price if it falls over .
The higher the price ,the lower the lay price.
If any of them get up to win instead of loose, say 1 in 6 lays you more than likely will loose.
It is very difficult to find false Favs , possible the best one can do is approx 20% of those we deam will fall over will indeed win, which guarantees you will loose if laying them on the prices on offer.

If one want to prove this to themselves.

Pick one paper Fav from each meeting , say this Sat that we feel should fall into a glorious heap. There well be approx 10 meetings to target , thats 10 favs for one to select.
Now I can almost guarantee 2 of those 10 will win , which means you would have lost money if one were to bet on all 10 to fall over.

I know it sounds a bit strange , but no matter how hard you try to find the false fav , 20% will still win . Weird is`nt it.
One stat I uncovered was that in maiden races 1110M & less .
Favs starting from barrier 1 had only a 15% chance of winning based on 5 years of results.


I cant help feeling that place betting would be a more comfortable option to the average punter because the initial outlays are far less & the divs one is dealing with are similar.

As for last start winners in the last 7 days.
The stats show that it is the distance of exactly 1200m & must be $4.00+ in the pre-post market that produces the strongest results & with a few filters, can show a profit , one of my systems I use, is based around this & has shown profits over the last 5 years.
Maybe the reason for this is that it might attract the specialists in this distance range.

If you want a simple system based around Favs , here it is, free...

Pick one meeting & one meeting only for each day of the week.
1)Target the TAB fav to win $5 with a $300 bank & recovering all losses until a winner is struck, using the TAB prices at jump time .
Make your min divisor 2.50 even if the price on offer is less than this.
Accept any small losses that may come from doing this .
2)Stop at the first winner for the day.
3)If all 8 races loose, start afresh the next day.
Do not carry any loses over to the next day.

You will see that there will hardly be a day when one wont get up for you.
Sometimes one will find that there are dual favs, say $0.10 apart , back the one with the best Wt.Rating as per TABQ (e.g.100Ptrs) or any other
Wt. rating source.

This $5 represents 1.66% to starting bank & over say 7 days , represents 11.62% for the week, on you starting bank of say $300 = $35 profit

__________________
Cheers.

The problem with that is get 1 day with no fave and it takes 60 winning days to get back the money you lost

Hi Jose,

Last Start winner within 7 days = 18.39% Strike Rate, 3.69% Loss on Turnover.

Last Start winner within 7 days 8 to 14 days = 14.85% Strike Rate, 17.06% Loss on Turnover

Last Start winner within 7 days 15 to 21 days = 13.76% Strike Rate, 16.92% Loss on Turnover

Last Start winner within 7 days 22 to 28 days = 12.52% Strike Rate, 19.33% Loss on Turnover

While you are on the right track, it is the price at which you are able to lay the selections which will determine your success. You'll find that you need at least a 20% loss to start winning, because of the odds people will accept.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 402,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/05/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Thanks fellas.
Hey Chrome thanks a bundle for that.
Those figures more or less support what I was trying to get at ie: that the longer between runs from a win the worse the strike rate.
Now surely it is just a matter of tweaking it a bit to get it into lay territory.

Maybe:
- price cutoff of $4:00
-Up in dist by >=200m

could push it into profit territory.

__________________
Jose'.

Now considering that more than 30% of favourites win. If you lay favourites and only 20% of those win, how will you lose exactly?
The answer: Unless you are laying the favourites for more than an average of $5, you won't.

The favourite is determined by the punters money, not somebody framing his market in some newspaper. If you are going to lay favourites, at least wait until you know the approximate odds it will be paying.

B,J that is exactly the tree I was barking up.
If they are laid @ <$4:00 then maybe, just maybe, we can glean a profit from them.
Do you have any stats/figures along those lines?

__________________
Jose'.

Guitar Jim. In post 2 you referred to the bookies beating the punters (making a profit) AS A MATTER OF COURSE, just as the TABs do.I'm wondering if you could tell us how bookies arrive at their prices? This is not a dare, a challenge or any kind of attack. I've asked this many times and despite being assured it's "not rocket science" or "it's no riddle" or similar, no-one has PRECISELY explained it. Can you? Could you give an example? As you are aware, if ten Forum Members did their ratings in isolation there would be quite a discrepency between them, but NOT with the bookies (watch opening markets at the races). There is SOME with the bookies but not that much. Thanks, and hoping to read you (or anyone else who could enlighten us), P57

Bookies frame their market based on their personal assessment of each runner, however, this is not what they put up on their boards when comes the time to accept bets. They will put up whatever prices they think the punters will fall for (these prices always advantage the bookie of course) and often these prices are almost identical to the TAB prices of many runners (primarily the more favoured horses as they are often overbet). Also on the longshots a bookie won't generally offer huge odds like you often find on the TAB. Also a bookie is influenced by what prices other bookies put up.
As betting progresses prior to the race, the punters will themselves influence the displayed prices, but if the bookie is doing his job properly and not gambling his market will always be framed so that at the end of the day he's virtually guaranteed to come out in front, even if he loses on some races.
That's my understanding of it.
But I'm not an expert on this rather precise subject.