Systems

wb

Some love them, some hate them.

The purists argue that it takes the fun and skill out of racing, and its much better to put the graft into form reading, and gaining an understanding of the sport.

The fans of systems will say that it takes the emotion out of gambling which can be often important in stopping the heart ruling the head.


Personally, I like systems. I use them quite a lot. That said, I would never rely on systems alone, and I also study form. What do you all reckon?

jimmyboy

It depends if you are following Crumbs System otherwise never.:D

mdwexford

have you any example of what systems you use??

generally i think they are a load of rubbish but each to there own i suppose

Colonel Sanders

Agree with MD, every year at the festival you hear people spout the same nonsense about trends. Just because the last 4 winners of a certain race finished 2 on their last run b4 the festival means f uck all!!!

masterK

It's difficult to give a definitive answer because the term system in horse racing is such a broad term.

As has already been alluded to many systems are nothing more than following trends, although some trends are important most are nothing more than coincidence and are based on fairly small data sets.

I personally think most systems you hear about are not worthwhile and will never make a long term profit, there are always some that will.

I'm a big believer in ratings, now whether ratings can be called a system I'm not sure. The ratings systems that I've come up with are a bit a of a system and a bit of form analysis, i.e. I come up with ratings for each horse based on their form and then apply filters to come up with selections.

GreenHorn

In fairness to WB, I think the systems he had in mind are more sophisticated than the "last two horses to win this one both had four white socks" types...

I would imagine that a mixture of following a decent system and studying form is the way to go... but I've had less winners than the English at Cheltenham so I wouldn't know!

wb

If ever you want a good laugh, have a look on ebay at some of the systems for sale and the promises they make. I'd make a strong guess that most of them involve loss-chasing too.


In general, I would condsider any bets that do not involve your own judgement as system bets. Obviously, when creating a system you use your knowledge of racing, but afterwards you just follow the rules.

I'm a big believer in ratings, now whether ratings can be called a system I'm not sure. The ratings systems that I've come up with are a bit a of a system and a bit of form analysis, i.e. I come up with ratings for each horse based on their form and then apply filters to come up with selections.

From my own experience, these are probably the best sort of 'systems' if you can call them that. I have a 'system' where everything gets a certain number of points for different things. (if its proven on the distance for example, it gets X points) etc etc. I look at around 15 variables in total. After I add up all the points, I apply some common sense, and make sure everthing is ok. I guess this is mixing a system with judgement, but it seems to work for me.

jimmyboy

http://www.adrianmassey.com/db2/dbaccess.php. Instead of following systems back Ruby Walsh. Just look at profit made by backing everyone of his rides and thats just in England.

kincsem

The three questions above all have a systems element in them so I had difficulty making a choice.

I analyse every horse in a race. Obvious, but not many do. If there is no horse with a very good chance at a good price, then its no bet.

When I am given tips I ignore them as there is never a reasoned analysis why the horse should win / go close. Many of the tips are for handicaps, which is like tipping numbers in a lottery.


This "system" of mine selected the Epsom Derby winner in 7 out of 10 years
Back horses with a doubled letter in their names.

2002-High Chaparral
2001-Galileo
2000-Sinndar
1999-Oath
1998-High-Rise
1997-Benny the Dip
1996-Shaamit
1995-Lammtarra
1994-Erhaab
1993-Commander in Chief