SIDDHARTH - TURFF Sat 17th Aug

Loopy Logic, my point exactly. How does one learn the ropes? there is no real help nor support for someone entering at the bottom level.

Ram, please see the thread on this forum about the Aus legislation recently passed regarding insider trading.

If you can understand cause and effect, and buying behaviour, you will see how this attitude is eroding racing's market. And a future market. No-one will support an industry known for insider trading, least of all the ones who are the base of the income of that very industry, the ordinary punter. I know that trials are and can also be manipulated by the few who want to self-gain at the cost of the whole but some sort of measure really does need to be put in place to help racing to enable to market their offer in a non-threatening way. That would include making certain people who believe they have a right to manipulate a system for their own gain understand how damaging this is down the line.

Right now there are 3 very serious barriers to entry - none of which are being attended:
1. complexity of product and availability of information
2. non-inclusionism (race and class)
3. insider trading - blatant activity and perception of activity

I believe there was a programme a couple of years ago where Barrier Trials were discussed and voted for or against by viewers. Apparently 70% voted in favour but Mr Wainstein and the RA never delivered beyond that show the possibility of putting them in place, in fact I think it was never heard about again. Instead, the bet offers are being restructured, which is just squeezing more money from an existing base.

Tracks are being sold and polytracks built so that the same amount or more racing can be had at one venue, instead of having multiple track overheads. But what about that 'existing market' that is shrinking, and what about that very elusive 'potential market'? Once all the costs are cut and the assets trimmed to optimal output, this 'existing market' and 'potential market' will still need to be attended. One of the things that can be remedied from the inside is point no3 - insider trading for own gain.

If trade can be honest, the buyer will trust. If the buyer trusts, he will engage. If the buyer engages, he will make time to learn and overcome the complexities (but the industry need to also think of ways to make it easier and implement these). Once the buyer has adopted, he will recommend. And so forth, the market will grow. This is not necessarily a long process, it can turn around within as little as 2 years.

ok, i take that back, see thread about GC getting the trakkus system (spelling). Holding thumbs they do.

I think this post absolutely irrelevant.
1094 posts and u beginner in punting?yeah ryt.
Not taking a stab at u don.
But first u claimed jackpot then p6,then ask about form?wat form can a first timer have huh?
Also wen taking a bet don't u see that there's been money for a horse?
Starting kak for nothing.
Horse was backed from the thursday before the race.a full 2 and a half days.
If ur a punter you wud look at betting.
If not tough luck.
Also loopy,no way that could have been the best bet?wat ratings????

harry hotspur Wrote:

---

> Loopy Logic Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > That is spot on Frodo and Don not To try offend
> > You but like All things in Life You should only
> > get involved when You know the rules. The 1st
> > timer rule is there To protect the punter and
> > hence You would not have gone out that leg of
> the
> > P6 even though It won by picking the 1st races
> > runner past the post which was not a daunting
> > taak,
> >
> > Just for the record on another threat Siddharth
> > was One of the standout bets based on ratings I
> > Posted on the Day early prior To the exotics
> > started, so I cannot See How You could blame
> the
> > trainer connexions of Siiharth for what I do
> > believe is a shortcoming not having trials
> > (although trials in itself could Be used To
> > mislead the punter which sometimes happens
> across
> > the World in any case)
>
>
> loopy how does a first timer in siddharth be a
> standout bet based on ratings?sorry im new to this
> game and have no idea how you rate a horse that
> has never run

I await the answer to this with interest............lol

We have perhaps added a further dimension to the intent aspect of the form ratings...........clairvoyancy?

rob faux Wrote:

---

> harry hotspur Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > Loopy Logic Wrote:
> >
>

---

>
> >

---

> > > That is spot on Frodo and Don not To try
> offend
> > > You but like All things in Life You should
> only
> > > get involved when You know the rules. The 1st
> > > timer rule is there To protect the punter and
> > > hence You would not have gone out that leg of
> > the
> > > P6 even though It won by picking the 1st
> races
> > > runner past the post which was not a daunting
> > > taak,
> > >
> > > Just for the record on another threat
> Siddharth
> > > was One of the standout bets based on ratings
> I
> > > Posted on the Day early prior To the exotics
> > > started, so I cannot See How You could blame
> > the
> > > trainer connexions of Siiharth for what I do
> > > believe is a shortcoming not having trials
> > > (although trials in itself could Be used To
> > > mislead the punter which sometimes happens
> > across
> > > the World in any case)
> >
> >
> > loopy how does a first timer in siddharth be a
> > standout bet based on ratings?sorry im new to
> this
> > game and have no idea how you rate a horse that
>
> > has never run
>
> I await the answer to this with
> interest............lol
>
> We have perhaps added a further dimension to the
> intent aspect of the form
> ratings...........clairvoyancy?


You guys have terrible memories,

I Posted My ratings on Turf17August thread on page 2 and page 4 clearly showing Siddharth as top rated, everyone that is registered (for Free) @ www.logicfinvalue.com got Siddharth as one of the top selections ( highlighted in green Daily) and in the calendar you can go back to any previous rating spreadsheets of the past.

Loopy ,I have no doubt that you did ......but based on 0 runs it had to be a guess?
If you added a comment to your ratings that suggested inclusion,with reasons(well bred, watch the betting etc. etc.) that's fine ...........but ratings that are not based on data???

inside information?

rob faux Wrote:

---

> Loopy ,I have no doubt that you did ......but
> based on 0 runs it had to be a guess?
> If you added a comment to your ratings that
> suggested inclusion,with reasons(well bred, watch
> the betting etc. etc.) that's fine ...........but
> ratings that are not based on data???

Ratings are ONLY based on data Rob, absolutely NOTHING else... I do not believe in insider info and never will, they are simply "opinions" of trainers,

Read the "ratings explained" page on the website, I have for a very long time now stated on ABC that form is not the only means of data.

Loopy Logic Wrote:

---

> rob faux Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > Loopy ,I have no doubt that you did ......but
> > based on 0 runs it had to be a guess?
> > If you added a comment to your ratings that
> > suggested inclusion,with reasons(well bred,
> watch
> > the betting etc. etc.) that's fine
> ...........but
> > ratings that are not based on data???
>
> Ratings are ONLY based on data Rob, absolutely
> NOTHING else... I do not believe in insider info
> and never will, they are simply "opinions" of
> trainers,
>
> Read the "ratings explained" page on the website,
> I have for a very long time now stated on ABC that
> form is not the only means of data.

Sorry I missed the bit that explained where guessing = data!

You could NEVER have made that first timer a good thing considering the form of LESLEY STRONG -
www.formgrids.com/subscriber/fgRaceResul...,ZA&hs=LESLEY+STRONG
you would have been following betting moves only

I am not one of Loopy's 'followers', but I think I understand what he is trying to do; a de Kock first timer would get a higher 'rating' than a first timer saddled by - well let's just say Trainer Jim - as de Kock's first timers probably has a higher winning percentage than Trainer Jim's first timer - and also I suppose a de Kock first timer supported in the betting would get a higher rating than an 'unsupported' de Kock first timer (I'm just guessing here).

The difficult part of course is trying to judge how much this 'data' should influence the 'final rating' - in my view it is is neigh impossible to convert all these 'factors' / 'data' into a realistic 'final rating' - for instance would a non de Kock horse that has run 3 good seconds in a row get a higher 'rating' than a de Kock first timer (and if so, how much higher/lower), etc.

Anyway, each to his own (tu)

mr hawaii Wrote:

---

> You could NEVER have made that first timer a good
> thing considering the form of LESLEY STRONG -
> www.formgrids.com/subscriber/fgRaceResult.a
> spx?rn=2013-07TN1244,ZA&hs=LESLEY+STRONG
> you would have been following betting moves only

You are obviously referring To the "form" aspect of the ratings Mr Hawaii ... Yes Lesley Strong did have the best form. I can confirm I do not look at betting moves for the " Current race"