Are Trainer Track Stats Useless?

Trainer track stats and my approach to Members Posts ‘section 2’


 Are Trainer Track Stats Useless? 


Flat 2020

Since I last posted my various updates and sorted out my initial admin/business issues I’ve spent some time pondering ‘Section 2’ of the Daily Members Posts, the Trainer Track Profiles qualifiers. (last year’s Flat report HERE>>>)

I’ve concluded my current approach to these reports is generally a waste of time and serves very little punting purpose. They certainly don’t work as ‘micro systems’ and I’ve struggled to find ‘advised strategies’ of note. (they also make Section 2 over complicated and must look like another language to new members – or even to existing ones!) What’s more they drain hours of research time (30-40 hours) and are a daily admin headache/drain as I have to find all the qualifiers manually etc. And post every day.  I’ve had some help for a while with that initial sifting and were it not for that I’d have self-combusted some time ago. On many days there have been an unmanageable number of qualifiers which even made using them as ‘starting points’ challenging.

Such stats are not an ‘edge’, (you can find trainer stats like that in many places and some of the sample sizes are too small) and I’ve actually been questioning their logic, which I’ll get onto in a moment. (why do trainers do well at certain tracks?)

There is also a practical point for this Flat season in particular in that I still don’t know when racing will return, whether racing will be limited to a few ‘hubs/tracks’ (I think it will initially) and what the programme book will look like; to name just a few issues/changes. Another ‘new normal’ awaits, and that could well be the case for ‘trainer behaviour’ also.


So, what comes next?

Trainer Profiles: Flat 2020

I’ve decided to take a different approach and have researched a collection of handicap micro angles for 12 Flat trainers. (21 angles in total) They are non-track based (well, the track wasn’t the starting point/way in) This research/report isn’t quite complete, but I’ll aim to share it by the end of the week. In it I’ll explain the logic for each angle and why I’ve focussed on these 12. Collectively they’ve averaged around 350 qualifiers per calendar year but if looking at the core flat season (May-September say) that’s an average of 2 qualifiers per day. And there will be the odd multiple qualifier.  

These angles will complement the other ‘micro angles’ section, (I’m intrigued/excited to see how the ‘breeding’ angles perform) the ‘horses to follow’ (eye-catchers/hot form) and the Big Race Trends/Festival work. I may well take a look at some jockeys also, but I’ll get the trainers report out first.

I also thought I could do with some ‘Flat focus’ and I may home in on these 12 trainers, especially for further research – when it comes to ‘knowing their horses’, a focus for replay watching, hot form analysis and ‘stable tours’.

Time will tell whether this approach works as both a ‘systematic system’ and also as a ‘way in’ for tipping purposes. However, this more focussed approach allows me to save the angles into HorseRaceBase, which will make posting the next day’s qualifiers far more convenient, given the ‘qualifiers’ will be highlighted.


Trainer Track Records: Where is the logic?

‘Trainer: Aims to find a race that fits the character of the horse’

This note is from my Nick Mordin post (READ HERE>>>) and it got me thinking about my existing approach to trainer track stats/profiles, and whether the logic holds. Or even whether there is any logic at all for my approach. (logic is essential to any trainer angle when anticipating that history may be repeated)

I don’t think there can be much of an edge with some of my trainer stats as previously researched, as the information is in the wider domain, and is likely built into the prices – especially top-level handicap stats. And some of the numbers may be insignificant and no indication of ‘behaviour’ at all. It really isn’t a good use of my research time highlighting who does well at track X in handicaps.

The performance of the stats would indicate as much. They don’t work as a systematic profit-making method. Even the ‘Elite Squad’ angles – (those that had at least 10 winners in the research period/25%+ win SR) haven’t performed that well as a collective. In short, a trainer’s past record at a track (certainly with the angles I focussed on) doesn’t appear to be an indication of the future.

When pondering Nick Mordin’s words above, that makes some sense. The trainer is obviously thinking about their horse and finding a suitable race. (I know that’s obvious, but when you’ve predominantly been thinking about the track, it’s good to reflect on the basics)

They don’t ‘back fit’ their track record to such a task. As I muse aloud, I don’t think any trainer is pondering ‘well, I’ve a decent record in 8f handicaps at Ayr, what horse do I have for such a race?’ . Or ‘ I do well in C4s at Pontefract, what do I have in the yard in that ratings band?’ – That’s warped thinking. The same with going, jockey, even handicaps more generally.

That’s not to say trainer track records are not important, they are – but maybe when looking at their overall SR/profitability.  And more so as tracks to avoid for certain trainers? Trainers may know their track records or which ones they like having runners at, and which ones they don’t. They will remember certain winners or success. That will influence their thinking but primarily the driver will be what race and what track suits their horse. Rather than starting with the track record and working backwards.


There are many reasons why a trainer will have runners at a certain track, on any given day…

There will be tracks that some trainers deem as ‘lucky’ and where they like having runners, especially if the horse is primed to run their race. (this could be linked to class/prize money/competitiveness) Equally there will be tracks where they don’t like having runners, for whatever reason. Or tracks where their horses do not get competitive, even when intended to. There will be the influence of owners also, and where they may want to run their horses. (especially if they’ve sponsored a race)

There will be certain races that the trainer has a good record in, and obviously they can be targeted. (that’s arguably more important than the trainer’s ‘track record’)

Some trainers’ methods and facilities may dictate where they run them, along with their assessment of the horse – as an example, whether a speedier type with a turn of foot (flatter track, poss tighter) or a grinder/galloper (long straight with time to get rolling/stiffer finish may be required). Their methods may dictate that their horses in general do not handle or perform well at ‘track X’. And indeed, the type of horse they buy etc.

And of course, there will be ‘horses for courses’ – if a horse has performed well at a certain track it makes sense for them to return there. For example, there’s a reason Really Super has run 5 times for us at Worcester. As soon as she finished 2nd there in July 18, she was pencilled in to return the following month. And the month after that.


They are some positive reasons…

On the negative side… there may/will be tracks where trainers run their handicappers to get their marks down. (what I call ‘legitimate’ handicapping – not race fit/ wrong distance /class /ground /tactics/crap jockey etc – as opposed to illegitimate handicapping, eg ‘stopping’ ) This may include tracks they know are unsuitable for the horse to show their best and could be more local to them – to save on fuel costs. They may have a horse who’s nervous/inexperienced and doesn’t like travelling. Those ‘negative’ record stats may be more important than the positive ones, especially for shortlisting.

There will be many other factors I haven’t mentioned. But I think all of those ideas will have some influence and lead me to conclude my current approach to Trainer Track Profiles reports is a bit naff/redundant.


So, that’s that! I could be talking nonsense, but it’s time for me to mix things up a bit in ‘Section 2’.

I’ll be back in a few days with my ‘Trainer Profiles: Flat 2020’ report. 

As always, any thoughts, questions or comments are welcome.

Cheers, Josh


Post Comments

Do join in the conversation below, we're a friendly bunch.. all questions welcome, and do share your selections or thoughts

42 Responses

    1. I know some did Geoff, although when I last surveyed the membership only 20% or so used Section 2 as a ‘way in’ – I think the research behind what will be the new section 2, the micro angles, Horses to Follow and trends/Festivals will provide a more powerful list of horses as a ‘way in’ – i’ll be pondering ratings and which ones to apply – i’m going to dig into the 3 i use and for the flat/handicaps and see how useful they are. H1/3 def won’t be going anywhere with the Jumps qualifiers, given their general SRs, but the rest need pondering also.
      You can then of course cross reference any ‘way in’ horses listed in the ‘new’ members’ posts, with track stats that are generally more available for free etc.
      Anyway, something needed to change, inc what may help improve my own performance, as there wouldn’t be much of a business left in 12 months if I carried on as before.
      Time will tell whether this is the right move or not, but you’ll have 5/6 months of ‘free to air’ content to judge whether helpful for you or not.

  1. Hi Josh, intersting piece. I have been thinking that with the season, when it starts, being so different from any other will any “stats” be of use? It looks like we will have only a few courses open so will a trainer who has a good record at that track be able to maintain that level when possibly other trainers who have never used the track before but need to run horsesand have a fit one ready. I think we will have to be very careful in the first few weeks when we consider betting as we will be in the dark as to fitness and why trainers are running horses. I think it will be the blind leading the blind. Will be interested to see what you come up with on race days.

    1. I think what you are saying about the blind leading the blind will probably be true. French racing is due to start next Monday with three meetings attracting over 1000 entries. Trainers will just want to get their horses going.

    2. Hi Gordon,

      Yep I think your general point about the first few weeks is valid – there will be too much guessing I think, esp fitness and what form a trainer’s string are in/how forward they are etc. Of course you’d expect nearly every race, certainly handicaps, to have the max 12 runners for however long that lasts for, so should be competitive action.
      Yes I suspect track stats as such will be of questionable use for a time- well i’ve spent that post musing as to their general usefulness anyway – certainly positive stats and at a more micro level. Top level useful, and when digging down, but yep more so to ascertain that this is a track where trainer’s horses run to perform etc – and likewise with the negative stats – but yes, trainers will just be wanting to run their horses, compete, get prize money, and keep owners. Musing as to why a certain trainer has a poor record at track X is an interesting exercise and could be many reasons for it. Whether any of them still hold, time will tell.

      But yep, overall, caution advised! I’d hope stats that are more behaviour based/indicate a trainer’s method may still be of some use, but time will tell!

      I am trying to do more ‘horse focussed’ content also with the ‘horses to follow’ and hopefully that may help in time- esp hot form/who’s chucked in etc. There will be some winners when racing resumes who may have been doing so when 85/90% fit, and they could be worth following. Pace analysis should still be useful, biases, jockeys etc. Much to ponder but up to us to adapt. (if indeed we need to) But with caution.


    3. I fully agree, I know racing has to come back for it’s own survival but it will be hard to see myself having a bet on it until it completely returns to normal, every instinct is telling me not to. Most of the proposals (limiting it to 12 runners, no stalls, etc) and the disruption to normal routines will make it a bastardized version of what it was and most of our knowledge useless.

      1. Yep, my instinct is to treat with caution – well, if there are no stalls that will be interesting – i’ve always thought the start is so important generally (certainly is when jumps are standing starts, horses chance can be gone in an instant) but even more so with flat racing – that would be a strange ‘new normal’ to get used to, or wait! We shall see, but could be a case of actually just waiting for ‘winter’ jumps to return, before can be fully confident.
        I’m sure stalls handlers can wear masks etc, I can’t see why they’d have to get rid of stalls.
        I assume French are using them on Monday, but will see how that all operates.

    4. I do not see why a horse will not be fit? Trainers still have staff and gallops and if they want a horse to be fit they will put a work rider on it an let it onto the gallops. That can all be done whilst social distancing. The staff still working at stables will be doing what they always did do except socialising with one another (hopefully). Gone are the days when a horse could not get 90% fit by training it properly at home.
      I think that the issue will be is who gets to run their horses and when and in what races? Especially if fields are limited in size. I take the point that only a number of courses will be open. I think it would be best to have three turf courses open at first – Newmarket, Newbury and York. have three days meetings . Then limit it to local trainers, say up to 20 miles away? Cut down on travelling. There are a lot of horses out there waiting to run. But obviously keep testing those who come on to the course (but try to avoid the government doing it as they seem to make an arse of it).

      1. It’s tricky Martin –
        as per my post on my chat with James Millman.

        A horse can be safely fit to race – 85/90%, but not fit enough to win (well not when race has other race fit horses say, or need to be chucked in/tactics etc) and may need a run or two for ‘peak fitness’ – obv many can do such fitness work at home, ramping up the fast work etc – But I believe you can only keep them ticking over for so long etc – if you were aiming for a target in May, or April, and had them ready 1st time out, depending on the horses age, it’s mentality and the training regime it was used to – you may have to ease off etc.

        It’s hard to know! But it well could be that many are turning up and will be fit enough to win 1st time up – if that’s the case it will be competitive stuff and plenty of ‘hot form’ with some races working out much better than others etc.

        Normally trainers know the dates they are working to , many with a 10-12 week fitness prog for their horses with that in mind – it’s the uncertainty of what date to aim for that will impact on what approach trainers take and how fit they are. Sadly you can’t just flick a peak fitness switch with a horse.


        1. But they are not at peak fitness for every race anyway. I can see trainers attempting peak fitness for Royal Ascot etc but not really for the day to day stuff. We shall only know when racing comes back whenever it is.

          1. No not within a season, (although once season going not many would be 85/90% fit mid season, after a run or two, and if racing every X weeks) but we are talking about horses that have been on holiday for a few months – this time of year obv different to when you’re in the midst of the season – the question is what impact, if any, will the uncertainty of return have etc.

            But the point is we are guessing, educated guessing at best, so yep just a case of waiting and watching for few few weeks I think. Time will tell.

  2. I agree Josh, all the section 2 strategies were very confusing and I stopped using them after a few months. The new approach sounds really interesting.

    1. Thanks Mark – yep, and there was also the issue that most were a bit naff!
      Time will tell how we get on- it would be useful if I could create something in section 2 that just worked as a collection of micros, without overloading quals – but in any case what i’m doing at moment will def be a decent ‘way in’ and should highlight plenty of winners, hopefully!

  3. When a large number of prospectors are mining from the same vein,eventually the seam drys up and the gold rush town turns to tumbleweed.Although I have limited interest in the turf flat ,think the sheer number of qualifiers thrown up by the stats,and the sheer number of poor quality meetings made it unworkable.So you have to go mining in less accesable regions.We had a great run with Tom Dascombe runners at Haydock but then the market caught up and 16/1 became 5/1.
    I have been wondering recently,i have never slept on a water bed but i would imagine as the quantity of water remains constant your body weight will compress one area and that pressure will lead to a bulge elsewhere(regular aquabed sleepers may dispel this analgy later),so if assuming the bookies margin remains the same they will expand the prices on the other horses that havent been lied on.
    The boy holding back the dam water has only 10 fingers so once leak 11 occurs the water rushes in anyway.
    Maybe system users could revisit and find profit again from old systems that have run out of road

    1. All good points as always Gerry,

      I suppose when we think of the ‘back them all’ (or nearly all) approach with trainers/tracks, TD would be at top of list. Well along with Burke at Southwell maybe? Those would be main two I can think of in recent times but as you say, market catches up eventually.
      There could well be older methods that swing back round into use, if newer fads/ideas take hold. Always interesting.

      1. KB at Southwell stopped working in 2020 but it may come back in due course?

        I think that revised approach for trainer profiling does sound better. One thing that I think trainers do is focus on a purpose for a horse, in that as an example:

        John Gosden.

        Why does he run a 2YO or a maiden on the all weather or a gaff track? So that it can get a win? To give it an easy introduction rather than a bunch of blue breds at a newmarket meeting.

        Why doe she run horses at Yarmouth? Just because it is a local…ish track? Does it suit immature types?

        Why does he (or his lieutenants in his place) head up north with a horse? Easy race? Owner wants home to (unlikely)?

        What is his overall aim with each of his horses? Just to get black type for breeding? Aiming them at Royal Ascot,The Derby, Goodwood etc? Does not have one just trains it and collects the fees?

        Etc Etc.

        You can do this for all trainers or more likely selective ones. I like to think about why a horse is in a race? We touche don above re why trainers and owners might do so to some extent. I do not think the jockey is worried about this too much and so I tend to disregard that.

        Hopefully we will see some racing in the next couple of months?

        Good luck Martin

        1. Yep spot on Martin – and I think that’s the right way to think/or try to – putting ourselves in place of connections and working out why a horse is racing here on given day – as always it’s knowns vs unknowns vs price. As always you can over-think and i’ve been guilty of doing that plenty – but certainly a ‘horse first’ approach, built on a foundation of ‘trainer angles’/ horses to follow as a way in, with any luck will be some sort of formula for me to work with

  4. I shall look at the French suggestions in the hope they offer a bit of ‘value’…
    Wasted my time on Hong Kong 🙁
    In the UK, with the settled weather, many are ready to run (and have been) so the races appears to be ultra competitive before even a hoof has printed. Finding a winning opportunity will be hard, because whatever a stable fancies, the oppos will be dark, dark, dark….

  5. I must admit to spending a great deal of my time in research with very little return on my time investment

    I looked these last several weeks at a few ideas, one of which looked promising and was profitable until using Horserasebase I found that the “great idea” was 1/55 winners for this year and it being an All weather plan….I wonder if it would ever recover such a large loss, most suggested plans have bank of 50 points but it appears this has crashed and burnt

    I do think Trainers are making it awkward for us and they all are starting to read the imaginary guide to confusing punters by Mark Johnston because he really knows the time of day to confuse us all

    But the smaller Trainers give us options, even if just to research new names and lower grade tracks so good luck to all who can find an answer

    1. You will be limited to the lower level tracks with the lesser trainers. The issue you might have is that the lower level tracks will be the last to get racing again with meetings?
      When Brighton comes back look at angles for Tony (A) Carroll runners .

  6. All you younger lads from my 70+ year old point of view over complicate things. I have tried your club and Geee Geez and felt overwhelmed by the amount of info coming at me. So yes Josh I think you are right to try and simplify your Trainer Stats. Back in the day it was much simpler. A handful of Northern trainers were the go to handicap kings some targeting specific big races, others meetings.. In the South Reg Akehurst and Ryan Price were the go to lads. I used to start each flat season with a “stable” of about ten trainers , with prior knowledge of there methods and use them as the nucleus of my bets. Still use a similar system
    As for the start up I should imagine it will be the All Weather tracks. The key to those Jockey Ship and course form

    1. Thanks Tony,
      Yep I have over complicated aspects, and indeed over complicated how I think about things, esp tipping etc – although stripping back easier said than done. It is a complex sport and you have to work hard to come out in front over long term, but it is easy to over-complicate and simple can be best. So, some work to do there!

      I like your ‘stable’ of trainers idea and that is something I could get into, and will be experimenting with, based on my new Trainer Profiles report – although now up to 13 trainers, which will probably be it.

      Best, Josh

    2. You sound like Colin’s twin! Good old Reg Akehurst. Dont forget Jimmy Fitzgerald and Ryan Price for a saturday special.

      Geegeez can be used for a number of things and substitutes for buying a newspaper to look at race cards in its simplest form.

      It all depends how seriously you take your horse racing really. Most do it for enjoyment rather than for profit. A winning day every now and again and not too much loss probably meets the needs of most punters in the UK. If you are tipping for money you do need to work at it a bit more.

  7. Hi Josh
    Every business has to change its way of working to stay current in this day and age which is what you are doing right now.
    As a pop in and out member I never really found your modus operandi easy to follow as it used to many off shoots so to speak. If you read any books by professional punters they work to as simple a system as they can that works for them. Same going, jockey, course, distance, OR, weight etc etc then see what’s in the race that might scupper the plan and then invest if all the lights are green so to speak. Simple but effective.
    Of all the sites I’ve frequented I always thought yours was the most open and honest and you are never afraid to speak the truth no matter how painful at times it may be. Also your videos are very good with no holds barred dissection of what you didn’t do or could have done differently. I will be 67 next month and I don’t feel like I will ever stop learning about this racing game. Kudos for your ability to see you needed to change to survive with your business. Maybe less is more philosophy is the way to go as you have stated.
    Good luck with the restructure

    1. Cheers David – I have certainly been stuck in the motions for a while on a few fronts – given my approach and amount of racing i’ve clearly found it a struggle to step back, stop and think about what i’m doing , why and how it can be improved. It’s sort of been organic in development but without every reducing anything, only ever adding! And compounding it by not really using all my research efforts to help in my ‘tipping’ etc. Anyway, we shall see what the future holds but I’ll give it my best shot, with a clearer head. And more non blog/race days. I had lost my mojo somewhat, but it’s on it’s way back.
      The videos etc will return at some point also.
      You can certainly never stop learning in this game which is party why it’s so enjoyable, but of course that can lead to over complication.
      I was listening to a podcast the over day with sports psychologist Michael Caulfield with Sean Dyche (Burnley manager) and three quotes/discussion points stood out…
      ‘work hard, a lot’
      ‘simplicity is genius’
      ‘you can get drunk on information’


      1. Josh
        You’ve made the first step by realising change was needed. Moving forward is the next positive step. Looking forward to the videos as you prosper.

  8. Perhaps being reliant on a single provider for all your racing information will lead you into the wrong conclusions

    I have never found Geegeez to be very good for my own purposes, and just writing that will certainly be criticised, but I cannot find winners whenever I have tried it. Me and it don’t work well together and the big idea about PACE for many might have been once upon a time a good way in but every time I have examined it ….I just have losers so hopefully what was a good idea, might return in years to come but by then it will be left to you youngsters out there with a more cunning plan to win the day

    1. No views, politely expressed, will ever be criticised on here – there are tools for everyone, and if you’ve tried ‘tool/website X’ that’s all you can do. There’s something for everyone, from the newspaper, Racing P,ratings, HRB, Geegeez, Inform, Timeform, Proform, etc etc.

      But, they are not the silver bullet – I mean I use HRB/Geegeez/RP/Inform and I haven’t been doing well for a while! Some of that is variance, and various issues touched on above, inc some personal, but also over-complicating etc etc. You can have the best tools there are (and I think HRB/Geegeez is all should prob need if you wish to find your own bets/be successful – one or both) but if the mindset and application is all over the shop, it won’t make a difference! And you still have to graft.

      In fact the biggest ‘edge’ that may remain is could well be good old fashioned video/replay race analysis – that takes time and isn’t something that the masses will do regularly, for obvious reasons – mainly time. It is something I need to get back to doing more of, and we shall see what difference it makes.

      For now, back to working on my cunning plans! 🙂


      1. In my opinion all historical stats anyone may use will probably be next to useless for this season and any stats gained from this season should be ignored in the future. This season is will clearly be an anomaly stats wise, well hopefully just this year anyway.
        The summer of 2018 was another unusual one with the long heatwave, not as drastic as this year of course but definitely one to mark down in terms of relevant value.
        The rest of this year is pretty much a write off for those that rely on stats as it defies logic to include such an unusual set of circumstances as a basis for research or system building. I think it’s fair to say that racing could possibly change completely on a permanent basis across all codes.
        Everyone’s lives has changed in the last few months and the majority won’t be returning to their same routines, schedules, habits or rituals without some sort of change ever again and that is the reality of it. It makes sense to recognise this includes the racing world too which means the way we bet from now on will be different to before.
        Maybe I’m wrong and everything will just return to normal really quickly. I hope not. We really need to change our ways.

        1. Yep I don’t know at all really, some things will change, some will stay the same.
          Obviously any ‘track based’ stats may be redundant for a while, especially when only a few tracks will be used initially.

          But, when it comes to trainer’s behaviour/methods – who knows! They’ve the same staff, they’re all carrying on as normal at home with work – well as normal as can be without dates to aim at etc – and if they’re a sufficient busy programme of handicaps say, that allows planning, then not much may change on that front.

          What the nature of the racing leads to, we shall see – 12 runners max every race you’d think, for a while – that has impact on pace, jockeyship tactics, poss strength of form – and the ratings bands may be much tighter, not much separating top and bottom. Possibly.

          The bigger impact on trainers in time will be owners I suspect – what horses, and their quality – as Nick Mordin once said there’s two types of trainers – those who train expensive horses for wealthy owners, and those who don’t. I suspect the former group won’t notice much difference – esp if the massive owners / owner-breeders stay in the game. Maybe, as always, the middle to bottom just gets further squeezed.

          Anyway, we shall see. But, there’s plenty that needs to change in racing – esp support for the bottom, and many other issues. We may be hoping too much for fundamental change though.


          1. Interesting you mention wealthy owners as I for one would be very pleased to see the back of ALL Saudi owners and their involvement in racing in this country and any other country whatever the financial implications to the industry. The country is run by a despicable bunch of barbaric cretins that deserve nothing more than to be thrown in jail or executed. Unfortunately plenty of them prop up racing worldwide and are wrongly applauded for it despite creating widespread suffering on their own soil and neighbouring countries with their appalling human rights record which is far more important than anything else. I would have no sympathy for any trainer that loses their business should the right thing happen and the Saudi scum is banned from racing. How it’s even possible for these trainers to support them and ignore the human rights issues is beyond me. These people are pure scum, kick them out.

          2. Well, i’ve no intention to dive into our colonialist history and muse on current global affairs, not on here anyway. That’s the sort of topic that’s ripe for musing in a pub, with beer.

          3. If that’s what you think then fine Josh. I’m not trying to start an argument but the facts are widely available. I’m pretty sure there’s a reasonable amount of scrutiny into the wealthy would be owners of football clubs integrity but I guess it’s different for racing. I guess it’s fine for the Saudis to form part of the financial backbone of thoroughbred racing regardless of integrity and morals and human rights abuse as long as they don’t do it in this country. The powers that be will always find it easy to turn a blind eye or brush it under the carpet when the pound signs are being flashed around. It has nothing to do with our colonialist history or current global affairs by the way, it’s about the integrity of the financial backers of horse racing. So if you disagree then it’s perfectly fine for bookmakers to restrict and ban accounts and manipulate markets to their own gain as they are also key to the racing industry. The only difference being is that bookmakers have a direct personal influence on us but we call for changes to be made to them and complain when it suits our own needs. I don’t see much difference really, apart from bookmakers not being responsible for countless wrongful imprisonment, torture and executions, but hey that’s not on our doorstep.

          4. I have many views on many things Chris, and my biggest interest outside of racing is politics – but one of my main rules when managing/dealing with the comments section on here is that I don’t talk or encourage politics chat on this blog! That simple. My views on that issue are irrelevant for the purposes of this place. It’s not a comment on your views, which are well articulated and expressed. I just won’t engage in them on here! 🙂 It is politics, and your views on said owners/engagement in racing are political/moral issues that are worthy of discussion, but I don’t wish for them to be discussed on here. Although, given the lack of racing, i’m surprised it’s taken so long for other non horse based topics to come up! And these issues are always best discussed through chatting, not comments on blogs, twitter etc etc – mainly as you can cover so much more ground in a shorter space of time. But, this isn’t the place.

          5. I’m happy to respect your rules Josh even though I disagree with you that my comments are political. I do agree with you that politics shouldn’t be discussed on here though 🙂

  9. We used to have a plumber who always came with a big bag of tools,but always had to go back for another,maybe if he looked at the task first and then got the appropriate tool would have been better.Still working out the moral from this

    1. Wellllll if you want your nuts tighten ..then why use a single spanner when you can use a “Monkey Wrench” one size fits all .. bit like our systems you need to adjust to the situation infront of you 🙂

      Shout out to the M.c.’s of this world and fellow like minded everybody peeps 🙂
      bestest regards
      GBster 😉
      we will be firing on all systems very soon my friends 🙂
      keep your peckers up !!

      1. Hiya GBster, haven’t been checking the site for a while. Hope you are well. Here’s hoping 1 June sees us off!

  10. Anything that’s in the general public and easy to see loses money shortly after showing a profit I do very ditailed anylsis of trainers trends Jock trainer course etc don’t work longterm

    1. Thanks for posting Tony – yep i’d tend to agree with that – plenty of my stats in those old reports were just too obvious/easy to see, and thus not that good! We shall see if my newer thinking does a better job at highlighting horses worth following/using as a ‘way in’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.