Form Study or Maths

sunshine said:
When Laying there is a limit to how far a horse can shorten, when backing there is also a limit to how far a horse can drift, identifying this limit is found through simple Maths.
Click to expand...

Makes not an iota of sense to me, I’m afraid. The only maths that makes any sense to me is on the bookmakers side to ensure their book is over round.
 
Ian_Davies said:
I've found backing the one I considered to have the coolest name profitable over the years.

That and keeping my methods to myself.

#nevergivethemtherecipe

Fortuitously, the internet seems full of people (evidently grimly determined to show everyone how bloody clever they are), unlike me, giving away their edges, left, right and centre.

Which is nice.
Click to expand...
I just follow Tanlic,Outsider,Reet and Euro..I’ll take their picks over maths any day..
 
Ian_Davies said:
I've found backing the one I considered to have the coolest name profitable over the years.

That and keeping my methods to myself.

#nevergivethemtherecipe

Fortuitously, the internet seems full of people (evidently grimly determined to show everyone how bloody clever they are), unlike me, giving away their edges, left, right and centre.

Which is nice.
Click to expand...
:)
I have always found that the ones that are "evidently grimly determined to show everyone how bloody clever they are" are the ones who struggle to guess which is the head of the horse and which is the tail.
As i said earlier, we are ALL guessers. Some guess better than others but are still guessers all the same.
 
Agreed - they have to price up every horse in every race, we can just wait and cherrypick any price we think is a "rick" (IF we can get on, that is!)
 
sunshine said:
I used to post selections, on the Betfair forum and on the Betdaq forum 'Sunshines extraordinary Each Way bets' and they made a substantial profit after over one year, so what do you think of that Tanic. I know and that's all that matters, I have nothing to prove to anyone.
Click to expand...
Your trying to impress the wrong man mate. I had a run of 20 from 24 winning ***** starred naps on here. Ask anyone.I don't think many people anywhere could claim that but that was then and this is now.
 
sunshine said:
I used to post selections, on the Betfair forum and on the Betdaq forum 'Sunshines extraordinary Each Way bets' and they made a substantial profit after over one year, so what do you think of that Tanic. I know and that's all that matters, I have nothing to prove to anyone.
Click to expand...
I think it's only fair to ask you for a link. Betfair hoard all posts and member details...It would give us some confidence in your claims about Maths being the way to go.
 
Form.

I find it more enjoyable and in the type of races I'd gamble in, horse form is more obvious.

I do like however this new speed of jumping figure that racing TV have shown this year
 
Tanlic said:
I will believe you when you start posting your selection and they start showing a profit.....until then if you could work our race results using maths there wouldn't be a bookie to be found this side of China
Click to expand...
Patrick Veitch !!!
 
granger said:
What kind of races do you see most benefit to this from?
Click to expand...

I don't have any specific type of race in mind, granger. I just like to have all possible info available to me.

I do recall quite a number of years ago posting after See More Business was beaten on his seasonal debut that he did very well to get as close as he did after making a litany of mistakes through the race; that he'd have won a mile with a clear run. I took 33s for the Gold Cup after that in the belief a clear round would see a good 10lbs improvement. The rest, as Charlie Nicholas would say, is Geography.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I don't have any specific type of race in mind, granger. I just like to have all possible info available to me.

I do recall quite a number of years ago posting after See More Business was beaten on his seasonal debut that he did very well to get as close as he did after making a litany of mistakes through the race; that he'd have won a mile with a clear run. I took 33s for the Gold Cup after that in the belief a clear round would see a good 10lbs improvement. The rest, as Charlie Nicholas would say, is Geography.
Click to expand...
Can you think of a new stat you'd like to see added to racing coverage?
 
LUKE said:
Patrick Veitch !!!
Click to expand...
:D
Veitch started betting with us for a short period a number of years ago and three of the lads on our trading desk decided to follow him in every time he had a bet. It coincided with what can only be described as a bit of a bad run for Mr Veitch and they did their absolute bollocks. One of them actually bailed out before the end due to a severe lack of funds.

NOBODY is immune from losers or losing runs !!!

Have a good day all.
 
Veitch was a clever guy no question about it with a mix of professional punting and selling racing tips.

From a rich family he was selling tips while still at Cambridge

He had money to start with many others using the exchages didn't which gave him a huge advantage.

That is where his maths came into it not from how many parts of a second a horse won by.
 
Tanlic... If you had been on Betfair or Betdaq a number of years ago you would have seen them.. I have no intention of looking for links.
 
NOBODY is immune from losers or losing runs... too true is that, I still remember a 5 week period a number of years ago that were dreadful. I almost lost the will to live, it all came alright in the end.
 
granger said:
Can you think of a new stat you'd like to see added to racing coverage?
Click to expand...

A few seasons back I subscribed to Timeform's sectionals service. From memory it cost about £100 per quarter and I reckon I recouped the outlay within half a dozen bets but I did learn quickly that, as with everything, it's how you interpret the data that matters rather than the data itself.

I would like to see that kind of data incorporated more widely in the coverage. The Form Book (as printed in the Weekender pullouts) now gives the closing sectional percentages but you have to be very careful with how you interpret it.

I stopped taking the Timeform service because it didn't cover the straight courses at the big tracks (Ascot, Newmarket, Doncaster, etc)
 
There is no edge to be had from any stat or factor that is in the public domain, thus accessible to all.

One of racing and betting's biggest myths is that it is punter v bookie.

It absolutely isn't - the bookies have to win to stay in business, so it's punter v punter to get the biggest slice of the pay-out pie and be individually successful even though punters collectively lose.

Ongoing private research, with results of that research kept private, is the only way.

Anything else is grandstanding and self defeating as bragging about winners and how you came to back them just erodes your edge if others jump on the same gravy train.
 
If you are going to take the position that discussion of a horse’s chances, reasoning and methodologies is just grandstanding and bragging then, apart from being insulting, Talking Horses is not for you. The clue is is in the name :).

In any event, it finally comes down to interpretation of data (as desert points out in the post before yours) and that is personal and distinctive and if there is an edge that’s it.
 
Sincere apologies if my previous posting came across as insulting - I was simply endeavouring to make a point I believe in.

I've happily operated on racing fora for many years, reading the views of others with interest, making general observations myself but - and this is me being brutally honest, which is surely better than being politely dishonest - never giving away anything that I consider of real value.

I guess my essential point is that no one can win long term by using factors that are widely available - like something a racing channel are broadcasting - as any edge quickly gets factored into the market.

People who offer betting advice in the racing media for a salary rather than operate as full-time professional punters do so for a reason - they can't make their betting pay.

Private research, with the most valuable findings kept private, is the way forward.

IMO - and it is, for sure, a game of opinions.
 
Form Study or Maths? Form Study and Maths surely: those two disciplines are hardly mutually exclusive

The form student ploughing through 'data' viz the analysis of races is - knowingly or not - employing some maths: the interpretation of third-party ratings and fluid handicap marks, the 'true' merit of a runner who met trouble in running or who was assessed as 'not off' etc etc

And anyone who considers the odds of a runner before placing a bet, be that a nebulous 'too short swerve' or 'too long lump on' or the more refined 'a bet at 5/2' 'a lay at 2/1' is considering probability - maths

So, in essence all punters other than those who do so for 'fun' by choosing a horse with a nice name, or ridden by a favourite jockey, or by backing unnamed favourites is using to a lesser or greater extent maths

Presumably, 'or maths' betting is equivalent to 'system betting' and as I have no experience of that discipline I can't offer an opinion
 
I don't have an issue with what you're saying, Ian, but this is a forum and the whole point of it is to exchange opinions and ideas.

To be honest, I tend not to say on here what I fancy until I've actually backed it. I don't see any harm (for myself) in doing that. I'm ahead of the bookies long-term but since I retired from work (13 years ago now) I don't bet to the level of stakes as I did when I was working. It's strictly affordable fun now so it doesn't bother me to let people know what I've backed. I know some on here follow me in while others will use my selections as a means of ruling them out :ROFLMAO:

As I said before, it isn't the public information that is the big deal; it's how to interpret it and I usually don't get too involved in discussions about that.
 
Back
Top