horse racing betting gambling
From the category archives:
October 23, 2009
RESULTS Thursday evening 22-10-09
RESULTS Friday 23-10-09
October 22, 2009
RESULTS Wednesday evening 21-10-09
RESULTS Thursday 22-10-09
October 22, 2009
I stated in my previous post that the maximum odds for sports lays is 4/1. To clarify 4/1 is the best bookies odds, as with the horse selections the price on Betfair could be higher.
RESULTS Tuesday evening 20-10-09
RESULTS Wednesday 21-10-09
October 20, 2009
The trial got off to a slightly rocky start owing to me missing the first selection. However, according to advised odds it clearly qualified as a selection and I have included it in the results. As I failed to place the bet I have used Betfair SP as the price.
Aside from that the trial has started very well. There were three selections over the weekend resulting in four points profit. Monday evening there were two selections one win and one loss, virtually cancelling each other out.
Today (Tuesday) there have been four selections for horse racing. Two of these drifted out of range before I could get on. Of the other two, one was missed by the bot, but was again a selection so I have used Betfair SP, I have also adjusted the settings on the bot to prevent a repeat. The other was a losing lay at short odds, again slightly more than cancelling out the winning lay.
This evening there are two sports selections and I expect to post the results tomorrow or Thursday.
RESULTS Saturday 17-10-09
RESULTS Sunday 18-10-09
RESULTS Monday 19-10-09
RESULTS Tuesday 20-10-09
October 20, 2009
Over the next month I will be trialling a lay tipping service.
Up to two emails are sent out each day, one for horse racing and the other for sports betting. The aim is to send out the first email (horse racing) the night before and I have been told it is never sent out later than midday on the day. Similarly, the sports betting email is sent out before 7pm.
The emails are short and to the point, and contain all the information that is needed. They also include reminders/ information of any factors that would disqualify the selection. All lays should be fairly short: maximum odds for sports bets are 5.00 and horses should be at maximum bookies SP (not Betfair SP) of 5.00. I have also been told that average odds are in the region of 2/1-9/4 and based on the selections I have received so far this would appear about right.
A single bank is advised, rather than one for horses and another for sports betting. No bank size is advised, but the advice for stakes is 5% of the bank. So for a £1000 bank, stakes would be £50 and with Betfair odds of 4.00 the liability would be £150. I think this could be a bit rich for some, so I will use a £500 bank and £25 stakes.
I had hoped to use the horse selections with GHB, but factors such as non-runners and keeping an eye on bookies SP mean it is necessary to be at the PC. I think it may be possible to set up GHB for use with the system, but it is beyond my non-techie abilities. However, I shall be using the bot to collect raw data for analysis.
I have swapped several emails with Lay the Best and answers have been prompt, courteous and helpful.
Probably later today I will post the results for this weekend, showing that the trial has got off to an excellent start.
0 commentsOctober 18, 2009
I nearly got off to an embarrassing start with this system, laying what was not actually a selection. When I re-read the information on the free-to-use site, I realised that I should be reading the chart from bottom to top. I decided instead to find a site where the information is presented in a more conventional manner, reading from top to bottom.
That glitch aside, the selection process is straightforward, but took slightly longer than anticipated. Even so it was not hard work. The main reason it took longer than expected is that there were only a few selections, and I think this will prove to be a trend. I do not see this as being a problem however, as the system seems to have been well thought out and there is a clear logic to the selections.
The test has got off to a very good start. There were three selections this weekend and all three were winning lays at odds on, as that is part of the selection process.
RESULTS Saturday 17-10-09
RESULTS Sunday 18-10-09
October 15, 2009
Over the next few weeks I will be trialling Football Fibonacci. There are no prizes for guessing that this involves progressive staking on football, using a Fibonacci sequence.
The ebook is in pdf format and is just 12 pages long. It is well written and easy to understand and in place of the usual pages of padding there was this, “We don’t want to give you the whole story about how you lay and back, etc, as most of you will know…”
There are just three simple rules to follow, the selection process should take only a few minutes and uses Betfair, or Betdaq and one other free-to-use site. As there are only three rules I will not give away too much as this is another system where the rules could be arrived at from the selections. For this reason, when I report I will withold the names of the teams and only give the results.
The system involves laying at short odds. Whenever there is a winning lay (team loses) the stakes are reset. When there is a losing lay, the stakes follow the sequence 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, and for the brave, 21 and are then reset. So if laying on Betfair for the minimum, the stakes would be £2, £4, £6, £10, £16, £26 and £42. Depending on whether a sequence of six or seven losing lays is chosen before resetting, a losing sequence will require stakes of 32 or 53 points. For this reason a bank of 200 points is advised. The manual claims that in the last seven months there has only been one losing run that got as far as the sixth bet in the sequence; that was a winning lay.
All selections are odds on, 1.99 or less, so the actual points lost on a losing run will be less than the stakes. Despite this I am not comfortable with a losing run of seven and I feel that for the sake of the test it is better to take the cautious approach, six losses and reset. That said, it will be unlucky for the test if a losing run of six is encountered, but if that does happen it will be interesting to see how quickly the bank recovers.
There was one point in the manual that I was not happy with and will not be putting into effect. It suggests that if there is more than one qualifying match starting at the same time to lay all selections and start a new betting cycle: the rationale is to speed profit growth. The other side of this approach is that following more than one sequence could commit a considerable percentage of the bank. Also, from the viewpoint of testing the system, it is better to keep it simple and pick one match at a time.
I shall use a £1000 starting bank divided into 200 points. Therefore, the first stake in any sequence will be £5 and the maximum £65. The minimum liability in any sequence could be in the region of £2 and the maximum is unlikely to be more than £60.
The first selections will be at the weekend and I hope to post the results somewhere around Sunday evening.
0 commentsOctober 9, 2009
I regret that what was intended to be the first update on the system has turned into a very short final review!
On that basis there is no point continuing with the trial and I recommend it be placed on the failed list.
You can get Money in the Bank here:
http://www.cash-master.com/moneyinthebank.php
0 commentsOctober 4, 2009
From personal experience, I have reservations about laying greyhounds – the odds tend to represent very poor value for the layer. Consequently, I shall test the system on the horses, before going to the dogs! If it works with the horses, I shall then run a trial on the dogs.
Overall, I felt the e-book was poorly written and I was left with the sense that the system has not been well thought out – results will tell. Once interpreted, the rules are pretty straightforward, but I had to read them through two or three times, to make sense of them. Also, while the selection process appears pretty simple, much is made of “Money in the Bank” for each winning selection, even though an overall loss may have been made on the race. Allied to that, the progressive staking appears glossed over and gave me the initial impression that it is a partial loss recovery system.
I have also been gathering data over the last week and so far the system does not appear to have made profits to level stakes, I will be looking into this further, however. While progressive staking systems rely on the staking plan to maximise profits and therefore do not need to make a profit to level stakes, the better ones that I have tried do make level stakes profits. The fact that the system is not doing so yet causes me concern. From the results so far, frequently the system throws up four consecutuve losses and that is often with odds at the higher end of the scale.
Mitigating against these negative aspects, from the data I have gathered so far stakes have not rocketed. Also, the starting bank is extremely small, as are the initial stakes. If I were to go on to use this as part of my portfolio, I would set-up some form of protection for the bank. This would most likely consist of taking a profit from the bank every so often, slowing the rate of growth but ensuring that I would eventually be betting with OPM (other people’s money).
The author suggests the use of software for placing bets, but that has to do with the size of the initial stake, and I will cover this point below. Even with the free software (BetTrader is recommended) it is necessary to sit at the PC to manually place the bets. Currently, I cannot spend a lot of time at my computer and using very small bets – rather than paper trading -I am employing GHB to gather data. Armed with the data, I can make myself comfortable elsewhere, then translate it. I will then be able to present it, showing exactly how the system is performing.
I have not been able to set up GHB to automate the system, but that is because I’m not a “techie” and don’t have the patience to find out what I need to do. I am sure anyone with the technical knowhow (which probably involves being competent in using Excel) should be able to set up the bot. Alternatively, I’m sure the guys at GHB would be able to help.
Despite my reservations the system seems to be performing well at the moment and is showing an overall profit using the progressive staking. Although I have only five days worth of data there are plenty of selections each day, so while it is very early days the trend is promising.
The reason for using software is that the initial stakes are very small, just 5p per selection, with a maximum liability of around 20p per race at the start of each cycle. The author advises starting with a betting bank of £20 and when profits have doubled increase the stake to 10p, then increase to 15p when the bank gets to £60 and so on. As previously mentioned, if I use this approach then at various times I will be setting aside some of my bank.
One last point, this is another system where it is possible to deduce the rules if too much information is provided, so I will post the results in a way that will not give too much away.
0 commentsSeptember 12, 2008
I have a review, of sorts, by Derek Hyde on his experience with the Sectional Timing Software sold by Greyhound Tipster for use, obviously, with greyhound racing. Due to the amount of work involved with inputting data into the software I have had great difficulty actually finding anyone else willing to put in the time required to test it, so I’m very appreciative of Dereks efforts here.
It’s worth noting that on the website you can get a free 3 day trial of the software so if you are particularly interested in the software or the accompanying service then I’d highly recommend having a go at the free trial first before parting with any hard earned! At least that way you know what you are getting into. However, as per Dereks review, I have added this software/service to the Failed section.
On to Dereks review…
Sectional Timing Software & Greyhound Tipster
Reviewed by Derek Hyde
This is one that I really have gone into with Burnsie (Bobby) – and I threw it out !
The selection software is fine but very, very, time consuming entering an enormous amount of data for each runner. The software costs £112.
I have had three 3 day trials, which in fact run of for about a week. The problem with the software is that on average about 2 or 3 races out of 60 races will qualify for entry into the software – I remember this as I once had a count up of a day’s racing. An awful lot of time is wasted checking all the races to see which ones qualify for using with the software.
When I pinned Bobby down (eventually) about the software he said that his own (different) software picks up a lot more races to qualify, but the real situation which he advises is to take a subscription to his greyhound tipster service. There was no answer when I asked why then was it necessary to buy the software. I have had literally dozens and dozens of emails with Bobby on this subject and also I have taken a couple of 2 or 3 week long tipster trials – one was free and one I got for half price at about £33.
He averages 10 winning lay runners out of 12 races each day but I found that the two races where the lay runners won the race they completely wiped out any profit and sometimes produced a loss. Now and again he produces 12 out of 12 which is fine, and now and again he only produced 8 out of 12 which was not so fine. The bottom line is that after many weeks following his tipster selections I made a loss overall.
I finally completely gave up.
You can try the Sectional Timing software here:
http://www.cash-master.com/greyhoundtipster.php
0 comments
Copyright 2011. All Rights Reserved.
