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
  #111  
Old 8th July 2012, 04:41 PM
Vortech
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Isn't a majority of the starting horses shorter than pre-market price due to the market percentage being less at jump?
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 8th July 2012, 06:22 PM
Star Star is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vortech
Isn't a majority of the starting horses shorter than pre-market price due to the market percentage being less at jump?

I do not know the statistics but my first thoughts and from what I see is that most horses are shorter then Fridays paoer prices.

So I do not think that is the missing liunk.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 8th July 2012, 06:45 PM
beton beton is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 589
Default

From what I can see, the privateer did not post a set of rules. He posted a set of stats that formed the basis of his system. The theory behind his system was to get rid of the 80% of the rules that only gave 20% of the return and keep the 20% from where 80% of the money came from. He saw no value in the fav. One of his sayings was that the horse did not have to come first to win. Hence he found more value in place betting and he stressed many times 1 x 3 EW betting. The only two points that I can think of are 92% of winners come from shortening horses, or 92% of winners are under their true odds. The latter saying that if you backed any of the winners long term you would end up in the poorhouse. Hence the point of the stat was to say look for value other than the winner. And everybody looks at the winner even for a place. He is looking for a placegetter that could also win. He saw value in a proven placegetter with proven peak fitness in quality races with quality fields. Beton
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 8th July 2012, 07:36 PM
Lord Greystoke Lord Greystoke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,237
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beton
From what I can see, the privateer did not post a set of rules. He posted a set of stats that formed the basis of his system. The theory behind his system was to get rid of the 80% of the rules that only gave 20% of the return and keep the 20% from where 80% of the money came from.

... He is looking for a placegetter that could also win. He saw value in a proven placegetter with proven peak fitness in quality races with quality fields. Beton


Looks like a very succinct summary of privateer's principles.

Thanks Beton.

Cheers LG
__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 8th July 2012, 07:42 PM
Star Star is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beton
From what I can see, the privateer did not post a set of rules. He posted a set of stats that formed the basis of his system. The theory behind his system was to get rid of the 80% of the rules that only gave 20% of the return and keep the 20% from where 80% of the money came from. He saw no value in the fav. One of his sayings was that the horse did not have to come first to win. Hence he found more value in place betting and he stressed many times 1 x 3 EW betting. The only two points that I can think of are 92% of winners come from shortening horses, or 92% of winners are under their true odds. The latter saying that if you backed any of the winners long term you would end up in the poorhouse. Hence the point of the stat was to say look for value other than the winner. And everybody looks at the winner even for a place. He is looking for a placegetter that could also win. He saw value in a proven placegetter with proven peak fitness in quality races with quality fields. Beton
\

I think Beton has used the Paretto Principal well in his summing up of our research. He has cut back to the chase and summed up our research so far.

Anything else we can add will be a bonus.

The key might be in Beton's last sentence.

Star

Last edited by Star : 8th July 2012 at 07:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 8th July 2012, 07:43 PM
Barny Barny is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,091
Default

I think most of his posts on Pareto Principle are gone from the forum, too old I guess.

He had 9 criteria, and yes he was right into place betting. He said he punted $600 x $1800 and had a 24% POT over time.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 8th July 2012, 07:52 PM
Star Star is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barny
I think most of his posts on Pareto Principle are gone from the forum, too old I guess.

He had 9 criteria, and yes he was right into place betting. He said he punted $600 x $1800 and had a 24% POT over time.

I edited my previous post just as you posted this. If I had seen this before I did my post I still would have hit the send button.

Unless someone comes up with another hypothesis it looks like Privateer was a place better looking for an edge rather then a win better looking for a saver.

Interesting different approach.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 8th July 2012, 08:24 PM
moeee moeee is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Star
I do not know the statistics but my first thoughts and from what I see is that most horses are shorter then Fridays paper prices.

So I do not think that is the missing link.

That argument plainly doesn't make sense at all.
I'm with Vortech.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 8th July 2012, 08:28 PM
moeee moeee is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barny
I think most of his posts on Pareto Principle are gone from the forum
He said he punted $600 x $1800 and had a 24% POT over time.

Probably bought himself an island paradise and is there now drinking coconut shell martinis being entertained by grass skirt clad hula girls.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 8th July 2012, 08:38 PM
Star Star is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moeee
That argument plainly doesn't make sense at all.
I'm with Vortech.

Moeee

I thought I was agreeing with Vortech too ?
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 10:28 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2008 OZmium Pty. Ltd. All rights reserved . ACN 091184655