mardigras

We are all chilled out. It's you that has difficulty understanding what has been written. For a start, you are calling the things written about 'systems'. Which is what I expected. You don't believe what you claim I believe. But as I said, you don't understand what that is - the same way Thomass doesn't. You are very similar. As for your $8,000 interest free loan and whether it is value. As in itself, it has zero value. But you no doubt didn't realise that. It's about what you do with it.

Stop writing it then. Things that others write isn't necessarily bullshit just because you are too thick to understand it. Which is clearly the case.

I think you've summed up yourself pretty well. Cheers.

But it is a given that the vast majority of punters lose long term. And the punter that thinks 200 on the nose when it's won means all is ok, is very short term thinking. If value wasn't important, next time I sell a property, I hope all those that think that, come along and want to buy.

Yes, but the whole value thing is less complex than it's made out to be. In you example, if you thought they should be all paying $10 and they are paying $20, that's value. If Jasper backs 10,000 horses he/she thinks should be paying $4 but are paying $3.00, then to profit, either is using some miraculous staking plan or they have shown themselves to be a poor judge of chance/value. Since 1/3 of them are likely needing to have won to make any profit, yet in that example, they thought only 25% should have won. It's as simple as that. If you don't know whether a horse is at value and you back it at whatever it's paying, then to profit long term, sufficient of them will have to have been at value otherwise you will have lost overall. And if you did profit, you would make a higher profit, by not backing those runners that weren't at value. It is very simple maths. Probably around that done as a 11-12 year old at school.

Quote of the year. "Value is outdated". I expect that sort of comment from a punter. I'm yet to meet a long term winning punter that doesn't bet to value.

You wouldn't like the answers. But rest assured, I currently have no mortgage and the last house I bought about 1 month ago, I just paid cash for. Hope your job is going well. Keep on doing that. Your point is that you simply a bleater.

From the continual bleater. How appropriate.

I can score it if necessary. If it's simply, Competitors provide date, meeting, race, runner# (name), odds or odds basis, amount. No problems. Happy with NZ only but as VC suggests, Oz is a decent option. From a scoring perspective, I'd be happy with any jurisdictions. It can still be fun for those that just bet NZ TAB. It's similar to other comps except you choose the races and the amounts like doing your best bets etc in those comps.

A quick response now as away for the next few days. Some ideas. A set starting bank. A maximum bet size for any single event. Maybe a percentage of bank (say 10%) or other ideas. Ability to put a bet up any time but must be posted on site clearly before official planned start time. Not after that, even if race is running late. Bet allowed to be placed with any provider showing that odds defined are available through that provider (and if betfair being used, sufficient amount is available at price stated for bet). To keep it interesting, minimum number of bets per week. Minimum spend per week. Open to ideas. When placing bet, can state either closing fixed odds NZ TAB, closing tote odds NZ TAB or fixed odds from alternate provider, with simple image of odds from provider being claimed. I think there needs to be a rule around when the bet needs to be put up if quoting odds from another provider. Winner? Highest balance at end of comp?

I know what you do is just for fun. But to be frank, you therefore have to take what they offer. Taking multi's is probably the worst single bet type you can do unless you are getting overs each time. If you have a horse paying 20s that is overs, and then you multi it with a horse paying $1.25 that is well unders, you've lost your advantage. Outside of the fun aspect you talk of, you'd do better just to back what you like at the 20s (overs) and ignore the $1.25 (unders). Or put the bet on the overs and multi the return onto the tote (if that is perceived as overs). A multi involving a selection that is unders is simply diluting your advantage. And from a profit standpoint, should be ignored.

I can see what you are getting at. Perhaps a better example would be a horse that doesn't place. Where the TAB let themselves down is in not taking sufficient bets due to poor pricing, allowing them the opportunity to attract customers that would otherwise not bet with them. And on the basis they price well enough for those improved odds to overall provide a decent return. In your example, the decision to price the horse low may have been beneficial for the TAB as few would have taken the odds. So less to pay out since the horse placed. But a horse priced at $1.25 that doesn't place where maybe the odds should have been $1.70, will result in the TAB not making much from that. So the issue is pricing across the board. They are too scared to attract decent bets by pricing more competitively. They are driving punters elsewhere - of which the most they can get from betting done elsewhere, is a form of race fields fees. But lost ongoing business where they should be able to take a bigger slice of the punter pie than what race fields fees would deliver. They prefer to blame the competition, when the reality is, they have made their bed and it seems, they don't want to sleep in it.

'Fixed odds other'. I agree, the website is a shocker.

Great selection Weasel!

Brilliant barry. You started this thread and suggested Hesi could use this to win. I wonder how many he backed following your advice.

Yeah - although I am probably the last person he would call on for help. Maybe I could build him a little 3 x 3 unit to give him some relief from sleeping under a bridge.

Agreed to help a mate out with some house reno. Been pretty busy and buggered from that!. Putting up some gib tomorrow. Hope to get some time to see a few races.

I'm not one to get concerned with barriers. Jockeys are more often the ones that make the barrier the issue. They think it's such a problem, they make poor decisions imo. At this point Rocanto at 90-1 is well over the odds. Even with what I just wrote about barriers, I wouldn't touch Melody Belle at those odds. Not even close. Ferrando is above the odds for me as are Indecision and Volks Lightning - maybe largely due to Melody Belle being so short. Statistically, the barrier is difficult to define any disadvantage. Very few races with 13 -14 starters at Ellerslie over 1200m. And overall, if anything, middle of the barrier 'appears' to have what little advantage there may be.

Maybe it was cutting up rough?

A couple that I like today. Kurow R5 #12 Sulu Sea $11.00 (NZTAB $26) Taupo R5 #9 Akaba $4.00 (NZTAB $15)

FTF, lot's of info there. Have you considered installing some database software on your computer. And then do a bit of teach yourself SQL. There are many free choices around for databases. Just allows analysing the information you have in an easier way. Options like MySQL or Microsoft SQL Express can be installed and used free. Learning SQL. Even just enough to load the data into tables. Then some simple querying to select data with group by and where clauses. If wanting to get more advanced and take up less disk space, you could look to normalise your data. I.e. have different types of data stored in separate tables with identifiers that relate the data together. Separating horses from meetings from races from runners and horse prior starts etc. Just means you don't have to store the same data repeatedly. I understand these things take time. But the main issue with things like spreadsheets, when you want to change something minor, it can become more time consuming compared to changing the same thing in a database query.

Not sure how you go about getting historical data around form. Maybe RacingPost subscription - although I'm not sure what historical data they have available. Not so sure about poor tracks, but the tracks are far more varied than NZ/Oz tracks. Tracks with big undulations and long uphill or down hill sections. Take a track like Epsom for example. A maiden might typically run around 55-56 seconds for 5f (downhill) - compared to running 62+ seconds for 5f at Pontefract - which has an uphill straight. I am not sure if any horse has broken 60 seconds at Pontefract for 5f!

Nice one there barry!

If you are looking to win the same amount irrespective of the result, then this is the formula for the amount to lay. Lay Stake = (Back Odds) * (Back Stake) / (Lay Odds - Commission Rate) So for your example - using say a commission rate of 5% (0.05) Lay Stake = (10 * 100)/(5.80-0.05) Lay Stake = $173.91 Return = +$65 net of any commission whether wins or loses. If wins, you get 900 - ($173.91 * 4.80) = 900 - 834.72 = $65 If loses, you get -100 + ($173.91 - $8.70) = $65 if you are looking to win more if it wins, but lose nothing if it loses, then that is a different formula but is simply laying the stake where (stake less commission = back bet staked) so 100/0.95 = $105.26 to give you $100 back if it loses and a greater amount if it happens to win. If the commission rate applicable to you/the race is different, you can change it to suit.

Exactly. Not 100% sure why I want to do it - since I don't know how to do it. But its just something I've thought about and felt it may be worth a look.