mick, I hadn't thought about 'professionals', but I suppose a list to consider could be those in the naps table. However, I prefer those that provide a tissue or ratings that can be converted such as - Spotlight, RPR, Formcast, Topspeed, Timeform etc. These can easily be checked against the early market odds in restricted races. Spotlight I like as I had some unbiased support for those involved:
Spotlight As A System (my heading)
Let me start by posting the opinion of Tim Drakeford regarding systematic betting from a free e-book published about a decade ago.
“The ending of this brings me back to the heading of this section: the professional approach. We believe that the professional approach must be based on racing systems. The system is the cornerstone of rational punting. A system is an inflexible set of rules for making selections to back. For those with good punting temperament, this may merely constitute the framework for selection, providing potential qualifiers from amongst which final bets are drawn on the basis of gut feelings. It is very difficult not to become irrational when things are running against you on this basis, though. This is where the inflexible system scores time and time again. Selections are automatically backed
whatever the gut feelings, and it’s surprising how often the gut feelings prove wrong, especially if one is an inherently insecure or pessimistic punter.”
(and from me)
The Spotlight correspondent is employed by the Racing Post to compile the betting forecast for a race or races where the odds compiled include a theoretical percentage to reflect the layers’ margin. This then needs to be deducted to arrive at what are the Spotlight fair odds. Fair odds, of course, are those where there is no advantage to any player. In the verdict for each race Spotlight gives his selection and any dangers for the race.
Corresponding with, Colin Evans (a man of integrity IMO) He was a semi-pro punter in the late 80’s and wrote an article published in the Smart magazine where he concluded after checking 5,000 races that in the majority of races the Spotlight betting forecast assessment was ‘spot on’.
I bought a book ‘A Better Bet’ by Professor Frank George in 1978 when computers for the masses was in its infancy. At the time he was head of the Cybernetics department at Brunel University. My thinking was that if anyone should be capable of crunching numbers he was the man. Some years ago I used to do form research for a professional backer and he loaned me a manuscript copy of a follow on from ‘A Better Bet’. The point being that in the beginning the Prof was seeking ‘value’ bets better than fair odds but after seven years he moved to finding ‘viable’ bets, this being a bet that could be considered some way short of value but still at worthwhile odds.
dave58 but to my mind he has already answered this via his above post, as have i and other members. When we post on forums its always preferable to suggest rather than to tell or assume.?
Jackform when replying to another members post you mentioned that you was not especially interested in discussing staking in this blog which is fair enough, but with good intentions could i ask you to make mention of the topics you would like to interact about as this info might prove helpful to all.
Chesham has made a valid point above, nothing wrong with posting a copy of another persons work but best all round if this is made clear at the time. This suggestion is not intended as personal to yourself but rather applicable to us all.
