Depends a little what you mean by "system". That's to say: not really, but I have my own particular way of putting together information from others' "selections" which I've been developing over the years with limited success.

Yes, I think I probably agree with that. But I was slightly lucky with daytrading, I think. I had probably done a little bit less real work on it than "the average eventually successful trader" does before finding, learning and applying something that genuinely worked.

You're right if you don't have a "ceiling price", yes. Some people don't lay at odds above 7/1 or 5/1 or even 7/2, which obviously limits the number of winners effectively wiped out by a loss. But losers (i.e. winners) seem disproportionately expensive, yes.

There are various different "staking systems" for laying, though. You don't have to "lay to £x" each time.

From my experience, the major problem with laying is that it's even more important than usual to try to do better than starting-price. The difference that this makes over a period of time is almost inevitably the difference between overall loss and overall profit, which makes it more time-consuming and attention-needing than other forms of horse-race betting.

Well, if Charles is out of the running (arf!) I guess I'd go for Camilla. At least she's alive...in a strange sort of way...

Back to your earlier post, and quite by chance, I was chatting with a publican yesterday. A well-known trainer (presumably well-known if you're into the horse racing scene) frequents his pub and has given them recently 4-out-of-4 winners. Of course, said publican didn't mention if the trainer had given any losers previously...

But more interestingly, he said how the trainer (and presumably all trainers) regularly 'pull' the horse from a race if conditions aren't perfect for it or if the opposition looks a little too stiff or whatever. This tactic is apparently above board - they simply lose their race fee for that race. But it has some profound effect on subsequent weight rating...

He also (the trainer not the publican) suggested looking at nags that have had a place followed by 2 no place showings...

I have no intention (at the moment) of doing any research in the Sport of Kings as I feel it's even more bent than a Manifesto of Politicians or a Planter of Police, but for those of you who do have a more avid interest, this information may be of use.

Absolutely. Very widespread indeed. The usual reason for this is that they were actually planning to win the race but something looks questionable (i.e. sudden change in the going) after connections have lumped on. Better to forfeit the entry-fee than all their bets struck on the day, if something's "not quite right".

That would be for horses running in handicaps, then, presumably? I can just about see the logic ...

Yes sorry. Just for handicaps. Apparently the weight gets adjusted downward for each no place showing...

I noticed that Camilla was carrying less weight last Saturday.

Was it because of the handicapping system do you think ?

Roberto,
You still with Kevin this year? I moved to Henry Rix - going very well.
Andy

Henry Rix has a nice website.

How good is he ?

Very good. Profit of £4800 to £100 per point on Sat... £5500 up this month!

Still with Kevin, yes. Less dependent on him than in previous years, but no complaints at all.

Good luck with Henry Rix ... sounds good so far. I know he can have some very good runs (if you'll excuse the phrase) but his _overall_ performance as independently monitored by people like Racing Information Database is really pretty poor, you know?

I always "go easy" a bit in April until some form has settled down, and I am to make 75% of my year's takings between May 1st and September 30th.

Glad to hear it. Who else do you use then?