Thinkin Problem, actually record keeping

[pktruckdriver]

Originally Posted by tom

I've been stuck at 64% for months!

Tom I can give you my 3 percent, at least you'll get over 64%, lol.


Patrick

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by tom

I've been stuck at 64% for months!

[jms62]

Originally Posted by RichieP

I can offer up these personal stats which has been posted here from time to time by me for years.

NEVER in 18 years of betting 2 horses to win with the Methodology have I ever come CLOSE to the % quoted. NEVER

MY win % betting TWO horses to win is 40%. Thats right 40%. Would have been laughed at except for one thing. I made money for 12 of those 18 years and 2 years I was away from society.

Keys for ME:
1) I do NOT bet chalks (less than 5/2 with 0 or 1 mtp)
2) I only bet races where at least ONE of my 2 win bets is giving me a chance to hit an overlay horse (minimum 5/1 or 6/1)

I have zero interest in betting races where the odds on my guys are say 5/2 and 7/2. NO interest whatsoever.

You can NOT write down an overlay winner for a race unless you have a CHANCE of hitting one by your wager.

Risk vs Reward

my 2c

Thank you Richie. I really didn't appreciate being grouped as negative for stating the facts. It's not about winning pct but ROI. It's the bombs that we get routinely that make this must have software for my handicapping arsenal.

[pktruckdriver]

Forgive me for reading the manual and stating those figures, as they were written, I too thought they were extrememly high, but then....they were in other ares too, and then you start to think, well maybe, if a 20 cycle includes 9-14 passess and then 6-11 playable races and you hit 5-7 races then, yes maybe it was possible, but the question of over time is also another big thing to overcome, for me as well as others, but then I read this and hoped, but the bottomline as you state is that 14 0f 18 years as profitable, not negative ROI, that Sir is impressive, very much so, that is what we our shooting for to be profitable , not negative, and that's why I am here, trying to become profitable, as I got the negative thing down pat....

Patrick

[Tim Y]

WAGERING upon handicapped evaluations has LITTLE to do with the former since WAGERING is a fluid aspect of the entire game: changes by CROWD response and has no objective status as does the latter.

ALSO that manual was written A VERY LONG TIME AGO. The input of hundreds of people using accurate handicapping services, and simulcast wagering were UNKNOWN when that was first proposed.

[barb craven]

Here's an excel site for you to look at Patrick.

http://www.internet4classrooms.com/on-line_excel.htm