• Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a free 7 day trial of Horseracebase here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Horseracebase so help is always available if needed, as well as dedicated section of the fourm here.
    Best Wishes
    AR

System Attic

Jackform

Jackform

Mare
Some of the old Sporting Chron sports forum correspondence posted has been received with some interest, so perhaps more of the same might go down well. Anyway, it won't cost anything and it saves me having to think too much :confused:. This first one must be at least 30 years old and I did try it many moons ago and it's a bit hit and miss and throws up too many qualifiers.

7 day system.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this Jackform Jackform
Instinctively I thought this was a non-runner and decided to have a look at actual results.
I set up 2 systems

upload_2016-2-6_10-19-46.png

upload_2016-2-6_10-20-39.png
Which I think cover the selection process.

I then downloaded the qualifiers from both systems and combined them sorting by trainer and race date.
I ended up with 16,390 selections from 1st January 2003 through to 4th February 2016
I then applied the staking plan.

The results are interesting!
Highest Bank +16,294 on 22nd October 2013
Lowest Bank -18,353 on 30th April 2010

The big issue is with the staking plan, particuarly with bit highlighted in Yellow
upload_2016-2-6_10-31-10.png

This results in a potential huge increase in stakes when a trainer has a longish losing run followed by a short odds winner and another losing run.

An example is shown below for PD Evans
The first column is the stake the sceond column is the resultant profit or loss from the bet and the final column is the running PL for the trainer.
So for the second bet shown a profit of 6.27 points is achieved but the running loss for Evans is now -27.73, so the next stake is half the current loss +1 which is 14.865, not a huge jump but look at the stake following the next winning bet (assuming I have interpreted the staking plan correctly)

upload_2016-2-6_10-37-57.png
 
Thanks for doing this, ArkRoyal ArkRoyal .:)

My gut feeling is that it could be a decent starting point for a system, but like you I think the staking plan is a bit bizarre and illogical.
I think a better approach is simply to start by looking at trainers that seem to have a knack with quick-returners, and even then I would imagine you would have to break it down further, at the very least by race code.

Thanks for posting it, Jackform Jackform - certainly provided food for thought there :)
 
Here is another sports forum letter from 1973 for consideration. I must tell you that I have a cupboard filled from floor to ceiling with back copies of the Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book dating from 1973 ( that's 5 years before VDW :crazy:) so this thread could continue for some time. In fact I am considering leaving my archive to the nation if my wife doesn't make me dump it first.

Short odds system.jpg
 
Jack Dawkins said:
dlinbgrove dlinbgrove Just in case you missed it there's one runner today from your posted system.


3.15 Southwell 3 Phantom Flipper Nicholls, Adrian T Nicholls, D
Click to expand...

Thanks Jack Dawkins Jack Dawkins - even worse! I accidentally deleted the system!

I have now re-input and added a few trainers who made a small loss @ SP on the basis I should beat that with early prices. I also eliminated all over 16/1 SP. Again I may back those early doors hoping they shorten below 16/1.

Phantom Flipper seems a bit one paced, we'll see.

I looked at a similar NH system, which throws up Rocky Stone in the 3:20 Sedgefield today.
 
Last edited:
Jackform said:
Some of the old Sporting Chron sports forum correspondence posted has been received with some interest, so perhaps more of the same might go down well. Anyway, it won't cost anything and it saves me having to think too much :confused:. This first one must be at least 30 years old and I did try it many moons ago and it's a bit hit and miss and throws up too many qualifiers.

View attachment 26529
Click to expand...
I have a similar system from Braddocks 'Complete Guide to Horse Race Selection' Circa 1984
Which he calls the FFCC, form,fitness,class ,conditions
The selection method FFCC for FLAT and NH method states.....

RUNNERS
No more than 12
FORM
Placed either 1st,2nd or 3rd in its last 3 races
FITNESS
Horses which ran 7 days or less (Flat) or less than 14 days (NH)
CLASS
Current form must have been achieved in similar or better class than current race
CONDITIONS
Horses form must have been achieved over similar distance and conditions as current race.

All blindingly obvious you would expect but how many punters back horses that havent done the above on the hope a horse will
suddenly take to the *new* trip/conditions or come back after a lengthy lay off and leave allcomers in its wake.
It does happen but more often than not it doesnt
 
valiant thor said:
I have a similar system from Braddocks 'Complete Guide to Horse Race Selection' Circa 1984
Which he calls the FFCC, form,fitness,class ,conditions
The selection method FFCC for FLAT and NH method states.....

RUNNERS
No more than 12
FORM
Placed either 1st,2nd or 3rd in its last 3 races
FITNESS
Horses which ran 7 days or less (Flat) or less than 14 days (NH)
CLASS
Current form must have been achieved in similar or better class than current race
CONDITIONS
Horses form must have been achieved over similar distance and conditions as current race.

All blindingly obvious you would expect but how many punters back horses that havent done the above on the hope a horse will
suddenly take to the *new* trip/conditions or come back after a lengthy lay off and leave allcomers in its wake.
It does happen but more often than not it doesnt
Click to expand...

We have a Braddock Thread on the Inner Sanctum, so you may get some response if you start a thread on the OS

If you can get a 2004 Copy, it is more more in depth and expands his method

Screen Shot 2016-02-11 at 12.01.00.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top