An infinite number ..... so for those of you who said none ..... you're wrong !!

Let's take a race with say 15 starters;

All have;
varying fitness levels
varying suitablility to the track
varying suitability to the distance
..... the conditions
..... the barrier
..... their health, both physical and mental
..... their class to compete at this level
..... their physical strength (have they matured ?)
..... then throw luck into the mix

The best horse, the one that ticks the most boxes, does not always win. Why ?? Well, there's as many variables for your horse as there are sides on a circle, and then we have to take into account all the other horses and their variables (ie; things that can affect their performance).

Given up ..... ???

Don't !!!

One horse has to win and one horse has to run last.

Aren't you better off getting decent odds about a horse with a chance, than taking prohibitive odds (I call these less that $3.00) about a "good thing". Look no further than this forum, and form guides for reasons why you should back the favourites few, that is the first 3 or 4 in the market. 90% of the systems and commentary direct you that way, straight to the pointy end of the market where most punters go.

Let me give you ONE example of what I'm talking about ..... a horse has had a couple of starts this time in, shows a little promise, has drawn the outside barrier. The scribe will say "surely has an impossible task from this draw", and the form of the horse is good, but not good enough with the draw. My contention is that this horse is worth backing because of the "negative" draw and the "negative" comment by the scribe. It Has to be well over the odds, had it drawn favourably ?? ..... Now you say, but it hasn't drawn favourable and the ratings have taken into account it's bad draw ----- Fair comment !! BUT, what if after the first 100 metres it is lucky enough to be sitting one out and a couple back ??, in a prime spot. It happens. Why take prohibitive odds on a horse being fit enough and good enough and NOT having bad luck, when you can take 10 times those odds on a horse needing a slice of luck early in running, and maybe showing improvement from it's previous runs.

It's gambling for sure.

So let's say this horse doesn't get the luck it needed, but the jockey did the right thing and didn't cruel it ..... Next start the scribe comments "didn't fire a shot at it's last start and can't see it troubling these" ..... So now you're getting more leverage on a horse that COULD have measured up last start had it had a favourable draw and favourable luck in running ..... You could quite easily be getting 33 / 1 about a horse who's right in the mix, who's up to this class, but has been overlooked.

It's that simple, but you need the mentality to look beyond the circle, find a decent horse with big X against it's name for one reason or another ..... it could be that it's lighly raced and has previously failed over this distance. the scribe will point this out, but why is the trainer putting it over a distance it "cannot win at". Back it at good odds, it's worth it BUT ..... Here's the rub ..... MY MESSAGE is should this horse fail due to bad luck or any one of a myriad of reasons, then you're going to get enormous odds at it's next start because it failed "once again" under similar circumstances.

I've suggested in previous posts to back the negative, and follow up on a failure ..... don't back a donkey tho', that's not what this post is all about.

This post is about finding unbelievably good odds against the lemmings top selections. So, back the negative and follow up next start.

Your eyes will be opened to the real opportunities that lay ahead of you, and you'll get an insight into how trainers place their horses. But you need to look beyond the circle ........

BELOW is a practical example of what I mean, completely missed in the market in a weak race over 1600 (up by 400m) in Adelaide

5may12 Morphetville 1600m $80k

DONNA CATIVVA 2f 4 0-0-1 34s74 B 2 54 kg

10th Dec 2011 Sht 1/2 hd, nk 3rd Flem 2yo plate 1000(54.5kg),
21st Dec 2011 3-3/4 lgth 4th Sand 1200 RST0, -
SPELL
12th April 2012 6 len7th Ballarat 2yo fillies maiden (slowly away) 1000m,
29th April 2012 3-1/4 lgth 4th Sale 2yofillies mdn 1200m



Then ..... DRUM ROLL ....WON by 4 lengths @ $12.20 …. 4 lengths !!!!!

and it gets better ..... This horse was considered good enough to run in the Group 1 TJ Smith recently, but it didn't show up in the form did it??? Or did it ..... it was up 400m from it's second run to it's 3rd run.

Had it failed due to bad luck at it's 3rd run, it would have been "write your own ticket" odds at it's next start. You're getting massive odds for a decent horse coz' it's form is "partially" (I say partially 'coz the trainer gave us a clue by running at at Headquarters and putting it up 400m) hidden !!!!

Maybe it's easier to find a decent horse and trust the trainer than rate a race.

I also laugh because a few years ago I backed Leica Larrikan at mammoth odds using this theory, and have seen a couple of posts on here lamenting the fact that it won at Flemington at huge odds and shouldn't have.

Good writings Barney. Thanks. I have always got the greatest pleasure out of finding a winner at good odds by looking past it's last start. Unfortunately, for me, I cannot sustain that uncanny sense of thought for long enough to find plenty of them. I guess this is why I have moved away from form analysis and towards systems these days.

2
2 sides
2 sides to a Circle.
the Inside
and The Outside

You can be inside and outside of a SQUARE moeee, but ...... ??? lol

Barny,

Most punters will not be able to survive the long run of outs which will happen. I can't stand more then 4-5 losses in a row. I have systems that bet at the short end of the market and can make a profit.

Each person will have their own methods that they can make work.

I applaud you on being able to back long shots as my personality doesn't suit it and I have no idea how you can suffer the drawdowns.

But you are right. Almost every horse has a chance.

rails run, I do have good systems, but the more I see of them the more I'm inclined to think, as I've posted ..... there is a fine line. Systems give you some confidence, but more importantly self control.

I've always liked "following a horse" and the package I purchased from Race Census, which is brilliant and ACCURATE IMHO, has further convinced me that the Castle can come quickly tumbling down ..... You have to face that inevitable run of outs ..... Good in theory ?!

If you follow a horse you take out a lot of hysteria, many myths of racing, and TEMPTATION.

I'll follow a couple of beaut systems, but I'll continue to refine and enjoy my selection method of "developing and following my stable"

I'll tell you exactly how I suffer drawdowns ..... I don't bet often !

Several bets each week max, that's it.

I like Barny's thinking. I have posted a similar thinking, in many ways over the last month here only to hit the delete button instead of the send.

I can take the run of outs. Experience is a hard task master which is why I generally only bet by systems. But every so often, I might have abet on something I fancy.

Maybe it was a system horse that I thought was stiff or maybe it is a horse owned by friends of the family. But whatever that would not be more then three or four times a year and only pocket money.

------
Now, this is why I like Barny's thinking. I may be explaining this wrong or misunderstood him but what I think he is getting at is the direct opposite of what other say and that is to follow the crowd.

Barny's thinking is that every horse has a chance, some more, some less. Going away from the favourites gets you to where the value is.

I have been playing with a similar idea for awhile now. Sort of finding short price eg under $3 lays and forgetting about them and looking for qualifiers outside of them.

With the shorts in I was getting about 20% SR but the odds averaged about $2 to $3.50. Forgeting about the shorties, strangely my SR remained the same but at greater odds. I had some quick wins and some long outs eg 12 and 14 a few times but the winners were about the $5 to a maximum of $18'

The wheels seem to have fallen off because I have had a few long outs followed by a ( short ) $5 winner. I am now on a run of outs of 12 but my SR still is about the 20% because of a purple patch I hit where I had 6 winners out of 9 starters with the shortest $5 and a highest of $16.

But, Because my SR was consistent through this I knew and was prepared for some long runs of outs to balance up the 20 % SR.

eg 6 winners at 20% SR means that I should expect 24 losses before I hit another winner, if I did then I had to add another 4 losses to the expected tally.

The above probably sounds like rubbish, but at least its their money and I have not had to hit my kick since I started this looking outside the favourites.

Mind you, when I had that purple patch, I thought I had found the Holy Grail. Then you start to expect them to loose and they win but when you expect them to win you loose.

Now, they are just a number, and I enjoy it better that way.

Star

Barny
Thats better than rubbishing other people's threads and gets you more respect. Ultimately it is sorting the wheat from the chaff. There are gems in horses unluck but you still have to recognize value, just as backing a majority of horses at the pointy end is a backward step. The reality is that each of us must find our own niche accross the range from Black Caviar through to the donkey due to be made into glue. The reality is that few people make money on the punt and the rest feed it. Hence there are people that find value and there are those that bet on anything for the sake of betting. Without these people feeding the industry it would implode. If we all started looking at your horses with unluck then your value would vanish in a puff of smoke. They are value only because they are "last years fashion". And yes they are also harder to find which stops 90% of punters anyway. Good luck Beton