Smartgambler
Pro-Punter

Go Back   OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums > Public Forums > Horse Race Betting Systems
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark all topics as read

To advertise on these
forums, e-mail us.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #281  
Old 17th July 2006, 11:11 AM
breadman breadman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Border NSW/QLD
Posts: 659
Thumbs up very nice

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelg
Hi, Merriguy.

The Metro system is performing quite well, this does not include Belmont which overall is in profit. I will now include this venue in the metro selections. Last Sat there were 16 Metro selections (one late scratching) for 11 placegetters paying $18.60 and is also showing a profit for July which currently has a 69% strike rate but only a 7% POT. If I had originally omitted Group and Listed races the results would have been more attractive. June produced a strike rate of 66% and a POT of 14%, and these too included Group and Listed races. But I haven't given up on non-metro and hopefully I can find something worthwhile.


hi michael,

that 7 % pto is good going mate. my baseball tips are running at 58% and my pto is 7.8% at the moment but thats tab odds. with better prices from other agencies its at 11%. with the staking plan im doing at the moment im making some nice dollars at the moment. it has although taken me 5 years to get to where i am now. hope yours can run for that time mate. im sure you can do it. anything over 10% pto on a yearly basis is brilliant mate and not to be sneezed at. on average ill have 40 bets per week. say i have $20 on each thats $800 a week 10% = $80 profit per week. remember mate your making that per week and not losing! thats what this caper is all about. now i started with $20 per bet each game 5 years ago. now im very happy and hoping i can continue at those figures. time will tell but as it stands 5 years no losing years yet. god i hope i havent put the jinx on myself. lol. keep on plugging away mate. well done too!!. cheers breadman.
__________________
LOve all sports.
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 17th July 2006, 11:53 AM
Chrome Prince Chrome Prince is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 5,868
Default

Hey Michael,

Have you considered having a minimum number of starts for the horse to qualify?

There is probably a very good reason why Group races are losing, and probably NOT a class factor!
__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 304,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 30/09/2018
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 17th July 2006, 03:22 PM
michaelg michaelg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 7,224
Wink

Breadman, showing a profit each year for 5 years is brilliant, and I think your selections can therefore be bet with confidence. But with my metro system there have only been 96 selections (including Group and Listed) so it really hasn't had a track record (pun intended) to draw any conclusions yet.

Chrome Prince, the minimum starts is two, but I think the problem is that the neurals can be over-generous in points allotted with these better class races. After saying that, I have seen unrealistic points allocated in weaker class races even in the CRS category but it seems to be prevalent in G and L races. I am somewhat of the opinion that this inflated distortion(?) can be overly strong for these horses and that a true indication of the ability of the other horses is therefore most likely weakened. I am currently working on a variation of the normal system using the CP and CF algorithyms, and even this early it strongly appears that if any horse has 20 points or more in either category (on a setting of 1) that they should not be bet.
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 19th July 2006, 10:43 AM
michaelg michaelg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 7,224
Wink

Three selections (metro) today. I am not looking at Belmont as I do not have accurate records, and also have not been included in the June and July results.

Canterbury R6 no.1 - Sacred Hill
Sandown R3 no.4 - First World
Sandown R6 no.6 - Stylish Sunset

If anyone's interested, Alan Jones interviewed Darren Beadman this a.m. who said he thought his best chance today was Gumnuts. But there's that saying - jockeys are the worst tipsters.

Last edited by michaelg : 19th July 2006 at 10:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 22nd July 2006, 08:06 AM
michaelg michaelg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 7,224
Wink

From Wednesday's three selections there were two placegetters paying $3.50.

Eleven selections today:
Randwick R1 no.3 - Windy Cape
Randwick R3 no.2 - Canadian Ruler
Randwick R6 no.1 - Prima Nocte
Randwick R7 no.3 - Fumble
Randwick R8 no.17 - Khaptrina (what!!!)
Caulfield R4 no.3 - Specard
Caulfield R8 no.3 - Gold Attire
Eagle Farm R8 no.3 - Sir Success
Cheltenham R2 no.4 - Dark Ambition
Cheltenham R3 no.9 - Vivonne Bay
Cheltenham R4 no.3 - Foreign Scandal
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 9th July 2007, 12:53 PM
Stix Stix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,267
Default

Michaelg/Wesmip1 (And other neuaral students)

I have read over past posts and threads that other "non-neural" filters such as no maidens, >1200 m and all the other "usual" filters, appear to increase the neural results in a positive way....

My question to you fellows (and other neural student) is what have you found to be the best track condition filter?

i.e Dead or better, Good or better, Good only...

I'm going over my old database and finding it a little tedious entering the track conditions, as I didn't do it at the time...... so if you could help, then I can decide whether or not to plough on....

Thanks In advance

Stix
__________________
Stix
.......Giddy Up..... !!
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 9th July 2007, 06:56 PM
michaelg michaelg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 7,224
Wink

Hi, Stix.

Unfortunately I have never taken much notice of the track condition, but I am under the impression that both Don Scott and Mark Read were uncomfortable betting on Slow and Heavy tracks.

My current Another Lay System (neural related) does not take into account the condition of the track. Over the past 8 days there have been 11 races, including today's race, where the fave was beaten in all 11 races, and most of the tracks have been rain-affected. Judging on this small sample, maybe it might be advisable to omit Slow and Heavy tracks if betting as opposed to laying?
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 11th July 2007, 10:19 AM
Stix Stix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,267
Default

Ok, thanks
__________________
Stix
.......Giddy Up..... !!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 10:03 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2008 OZmium Pty. Ltd. All rights reserved . ACN 091184655