MARCUS STARTED IT...LET'S CONTINUE

[lousycapperII]

How many factors do you use in your handicapping? Let's hear from you.

-LCII

[Speed Figure]

I have about 95,000 but, only use 10. ;)

[Steve 'StatMan']

Never botherd to count. Won't come out to a round number, either. Every race is different. Probably couldn't find even 1,000 factors in a race full of first starters.

I could have the winner in every race - once I just start hitting the 'ALL' button! :rolleyes: I could get over 100,000 winners if I did that for every TB, Harness, QH, Arabian, Greyhound in the country for a year. I'd end up with a small fortune, too - provided I started out with a very large fortune. :D

[lousycapperII]

:D And I thought I was the clown around here... :D

-LCII

[marcus]

You have 25 runners in a race as was the case at the 2.25 at Wetherby today can you give me the equation of them all finishing in order from 1st to 25th (perm it is the term here) what is the factor ? multiply this to the points i sent you and the other 360 to be added,plus the going change,betting exchange price fluctuation which works on decimal points over here, are you getting the idea? No because you havent got a clue about horse racing here in england let alone my data base. Maths: Answer this, you have 7 dice what is the factor of throwing a six with the first one,a 3 with the second one,a 2 with the 3rd one, a 5 with the 4th one,a 6 with the 5th one, a 4 with the 6th one and a 5 with the last one ? ok over to you burger girl.

[lousycapperII]

Originally posted by marcus
You have 25 runners in a race as was the case at the 2.25 at Wetherby today can you give me the equation of them all finishing in order from 1st to 25th (perm it is the term here) what is the factor ? multiply this to the points i sent you and the other 360 to be added,plus the going change,betting exchange price fluctuation which works on decimal points over here, are you getting the idea? No because you havent got a clue about horse racing here in england let alone my data base. Maths: Answer this, you have 7 dice what is the factor of throwing a six with the first one,a 3 with the second one,a 2 with the 3rd one, a 5 with the 4th one,a 6 with the 5th one, a 4 with the 6th one and a 5 with the last one ? ok over to you burger girl.

Mr. Marcus,

Factor this:

You can bamboozle most of these people with your clap-trap, however, the most important factor that you've failed to reveal to all of us is your return factor. I'm quite sure the suspense is killing the folks on this forum. If you have a positive return that equals credit card interest rates in the U.S.A. we're interested.

10-4 over and out.

-LCII

[marcus]

SORRY YOU DIDNT ANSWER THE MATHS, TO HARD WAS IT, well il answer yours i earn £1265 an hour tax free, i have accounts in Dubai,Hong Kong and Egypt which are all tax free to foreign investors, and thats with out my Winnings, just my clients fees for the syndications , i think ive said enough now ive answered your question now answer mine ?

[Steve 'StatMan']

Don't know about burger girl, but my non-scientific calculator can't hold the value for 25! (25 factorial) . Far, far above a billion, that's for sure. The odds of any particular number on a 6-sided die, regardless of the other die, is just 1 out of 6. Not sure what, if any of it, applies.

If by comparing different pieces of information, say N factors , multipiled by X horses, if you mean N * X, or n*x!, or something similar,if that is the 97,000 or above, I could understand, but would probably call it the number of possible combinations.

I know when I think of Factors, a single factor would be, say, 'finish position last race'. Would only count as 1 factor. No matter whether the horse finished 1st or 25th in his last race. No matter if there are 25 horses in todays race. Most of us would think 'finish position last race' is just one factor. 'Number of lifetime wins', again, just one factor. No matter if the horse has won 0 or 20 races, it is only one factor.

That's one reason 97,000 factors just doesn't sound right, as I believe most of use are interpreting it.

Normally, we only think of winning selections as having one's top choice win the race. To offer a correct prediction on a race, such as 'the #4 will not finish in the money' is fine, but has nothing compatible in normal U.S. racing. That sounds more like proposition wagering. Maybe you can make those kind of wagers in betting exchanges, but that isn't what folks in U.S. racing would call a 'Win'. Nor would a single win when betting mulitple horses in a race, etc.

Maybe this is all a comparison/betting world issue. If you do great in the U.K., that's great! Then you should keep betting on U.K. racing. But I don't know that what you've been describing fits in with the regular world of Win-Place-Show and exotic betting here in the U.S. And if you aren't able to express your results as in Number of Top Selections Made, Number of Top Selections that finished First, etc., and more importantly, what was the overall return on investment, folks really have now way to accept what you're saying. It just isn't making sense - sorry.

[Steve 'StatMan']

On a more lighter note - my doctor said he wanted me to lose 50 pounds, so I started betting English racing. :D

(For clarification, pounds in the U.S. is a measure of weight).

[pat]

It appears that this guy Marcus is PISSING on our backs and telling us we are sweating (hahahahahahaha

[marcus]

I thankyou for a very interesting read, this has shed some light as to the way things are in the usa and the way people calculate/ interpret factors. The uk betting scene/horse racing is very different to the usa, hence we interpret the same thing in a different way, my whizo (computer data programmer) explains this as factors to the out come of any given race, hence 97,000 equations are calculated in any one race to produce a given winner. A winner is calculated as a profitable bet be it weather the horse is layed (you back it to lose the race) or to win the race, as im sure you are aware there are many unaccountables that you cannot calculate within a race which is were a betting staking plan/formula kicks in, so if i lose a bet it is covered in the next race with an added calculation to make profit, i hope i am explaining myself clearly as i think we agree that we are singing from the same song sheet but in a different key ! kind regards marcus

[MV McKee]

I tried to open an account to bet on English racing (through an English bookmaker). My application was rejected.....they explained that it was not related to the fact that I resided in the U.S. (my initial suspicion). In fact it was related to a saliva sample I was required to provide at the time I attempted to open my account (yes, I did think that was odd).
It all made sense once they explained it to me. Here is the actual English statute:

Subsection 367A:

All U.K. account wagering applicants agree to avail themselves to any and all requests for subsequent random saliva testing. Additionally, all applicants shall be requested to submit a saliva sample prior to the account being activated.
Failure to provide such a sample within 48 hours of the request shall result in immediate suspension of the wagering account.

367B:
Saliva samples will be labeled and sent to an independent laboratory for testing. Any sample testing positive for >5 ppm of any decay-preventing dentifrice shall be referred to the regulatory body, and the associated wagering account shall be immediately suspended for a period of not less than 30 days. The account is not eligible for reactivation until the legal account holder submits a saliva sample which results in a negative test.

Footnotes:
Account holders residing in districts with fluoridated water are precluded from opening accounts with any of the English bookmaking firms.
Additionally, any account holders found to be in possession of any bleaching agents (a.k.a. "white strips") will receive lifetime bans.


Ha ha......

[Steve 'StatMan']

Some things are starting to clear, I think.

In the US, you can only bet on a horse to succeed - Win, Place or Show. The only way you could bet a horse to 'not win' is to make a bet on every other horse in the race except the one you want to fail. So, you could bet a minimum of $2 to win on the #4, or you could bet $2 mulitiple times, once for every other horse. If 9 horses in the race, that'd be $16 in bets ($2 on the 1-3, 5-9). But I've rarely ever heard of people doing that type of betting here. It'd take proper portions to bet on all those other horses, not known until the last minute, and you'd still have to beat the typical 17% takeout rate.

So, when U.S. bettors think of having a winner, they mean betting one horse to win, in the Win pool. Betting on 2 or more horses to win a race is often called 'dutching', and is often done with proportional wagers.

When everyone here thinks of a public selector picking winners, they assume it is Top Selection was the official winner in the 'Win Pool'. The ratio of Successful Top Selections to Total Top Selections would be the Win %, and the R.O.I. is the return on investment for a flat $2 bet, either as a +/- %, or in $ returned per $1 or $2 bet.

In the Money statistics would be to either Win, Place, or Show.

Any statistics involving anything other than the straight 'Win-Place-Show' has nothing to base a comparison on. All stats given are just presumed to be in this format.

[VetScratch]

Marcus,Answer this, you have 7 dice what is the factor of throwing a six with the first one,a 3 with the second one,a 2 with the 3rd one, a 5 with the 4th one,a 6 with the 5th one, a 4 with the 6th one and a 5 with the last one?For 7 die thrown serially, I bet 632-5645 is more likely than 279936/1 because every telemarketer seems to randomly guess my number. :) :)

[Steve 'StatMan']

When I think of equations, I'm thinking of:

a = b + c
x = y^2

etc.

So when I see 97,000 equations, I'm thinking 97,000 of those things. What I think you really mean is, you have instructions or calculations in your programs, that are iterated (executed over and over) roughly 97,000 times.

So, things like the b'c, c's, and y's above I would call 'factors', like 'beaten lengths at the finish', and the number of times the computer executes 'a=b+c' as a calculation. The number of times one caluculates and compares the value of 'a' for all horses would add to those calculations. That, I could see, being 97,000 times, or much, much more.

[marcus]

i thankyou once again understanding the usa betting scene, im amazed you cant back losing horses, yet when i was over there in sept 03 , i used my english accounts via internet and had a ball, ok on uk racing as this was my original plan to do this in the usa, im not sure if i understand but do you have to pay tax on your winnings (is it deducted before hand?) there is no betting tax here in the uk you keep all of your winnings, i have an idea , i set up english accounts for you guys and give you my tips of the day then we all win in the usa. when i quoted 4487 winners these are infact winning horses 1st past the post i know its hard to believe but it realy is true as God is my witness (im a christian if i didnt say before) i lay horses every day and run syndicates for investment clients, lets summarise what i do . 3 meetings (today) i have a horse in each race that is backed to win (22 races today) i back the first horse to win x amount if it loses i back a horse in the next race to cover my losing bet plus what do i want to win (this is calculated at the best price i can get at the time of the race) on this second horse and so on until i get a winner (using my staking plan and formula) when i get the winner i get back all that ive lost plus a profit. Then i start again and so on , in the mean time i lay horses also in these races which cover these bets or makes profit, does that sound understandable ? regards marcus

[Steve 'StatMan']

The takeout (17% usually in W-P-S pools, 20% or more in Exactas, Trifectas, etc) usually pays a small state tax, operating expenses for the track and/or bet taking company, and contributes to the purse accounts that the horsemen earn.

I knew the 4,000 plus winners on top were possible, given enough races selected. Win % and ROI is usually crucial. It you have been successful raising your bets after you lose, well, then you must be truly blessed. Maybe it is easier to accomplish when you have the option of betting a horse to fail. But I learned minor expensive lesson a long time ago, about increasing my wagers while losing. Happened when I was just a gambler at the race track, long before I learned how to handicap. In fact, failure at wagering strategies led me to the desire to learn how to handicap in the first place. Now I work as a selector for the company whose sheets I used to buy many years ago.

So, I'll wish you good success - am reading here you've been wildly successful - but I'm going to avoid getting back into incremental betting strategies, at least for now.

[Steve 'StatMan']

I forgot - taxes. The laws may apply differently to foreigners, and even the state of Maryland has a strange new law I read about recently. But anyway, at least for U.S. citizens, as I am aware:

If the odds of the payoff are at least $600 and the odds of the wager were 300/1 or more, the wager, and all like wagers, are to be reported as income to the I.R.S. (Internal Revenue Servie, the taxing arm of the U.S. Gov.). After the year is over, your need to include the winnings on those wagers as income.

If the amount of your winnings on this type of wager is $5000, on a single, or combined similar single wager, then 28% tax is withheld by the payer, with the original amount declared as income, and the withheld amount as taxes withheld - or essentially pre-paid, pending your final year-end tax results.

There are ways to offset your losses vs. your winnings, but requires signifcant documentation. A professional player would definitely want to do this.

These are the main points, but there are a few others.

[marcus]

i backed 6935 horses to win last year and had 4487 1st past the post , 6842 lay bets and 5213 lost (lay is to lose) which i won as stated, using the game plan/syndication, the hardest part was getting the bets on until i poached staff from strategic places, this helped a lot and gave me inside workings. it seems harder to win in the usa, but am i right in saying you have less in a given race than we do (16 upto 34 in a race ) regards marcus

[marcus]

can i say a big thankyou for all your info this is just what i needed, you sure have it tough over there, with all your taxes, irs, It is very hard when you go to a forign country to know were to start hence home work now, better to know a little than nothing at all before i come back to florida, many thanks once again and if i can be of any help heres my e-mail address marcushorse@aol.com kind regards and good night busy day tomorrow and its midnight over here regards marcus

[Steve 'StatMan']

The field sizes in the U.S. are much smaller. The top limit of starters is usually 14, except for a rare one like the KY Derby. The average is between 8 and 9.

When betting (win), did any of those races won include more betting more than one horse in the same race, to win?

[Steve 'StatMan']

Whoops! Good Night!

[freeneasy]

soon to be seen on the tel'e 'americas most wanted'
your all this and your all that and you have all these betting parlors and partnerships and syndicates in hong kong and other parts of the world, backing this horse and laying that horse, using heaven as your insurence carrier to convince all peoples of your balony eh, honesty.
and now you want all to believe that with and throughout all this tremendous racing success of yours that you dont know the first damndest thing about american racing? not even the win , place and show system of wadgering?
and so now you want all on this board to also believe as well that you have a win per cent of 64.7 and a lay-win per cent of 76.19?
boy you just cant lose for win'n can ya.
my, my. u is da man, u got it goin on baby. dont tell me, u got so much money u got to throw most of it away just to get rid of the excess weight.
oh please sir of mercy and kindness, forgive me and except me into your fold of luxury, wealth and ease. just show me where to sign to become a target, er ah, pidgeon er, er i mean just show me where to sign to become a bestowee and receiver of such lavishly designed and distributed racing information. here, take my money.
need to change your name from mr. marc to the burgermiester shiester. top that

[Valuist]

65% hits on win bets over almost 7000 races? Nobody on this board is gullible enough to believe anyone can come remotely close to that. You're insulting the intelligence of everyone on this board with ridiculous claims like that. Us Yanks aren't that foolish to buy such, if I may use a British term, "bloody rubbish".

[freeneasy]

now you want to know something about weather or not we have security and survalence systems set up in and around our racetracks.
why? got run out of the uk for pickpocketing and need to set up camp where your face isnt on every racetrack security poster. indeed. you check'n us out. boy are you one dopey guy. do we have security setups and survalence systems. what a rummy.
hamlet the scamlet. and when you move to florida you can introduce yourself as "hammie the scammie from miami"

[lousycapperII]

Originally posted by marcus
SORRY YOU DIDNT ANSWER THE MATHS, TO HARD WAS IT

Mr. Marcus,

I've been doing homework otherwise, I would have replied sooner.

If I've read your problem correctly...

If you have the seven dice and you want an exact sequence like you have specified, then the occurence has only one way that it can happen. Therefore, one would just raise 1/6th to the 7th power to get the probability of that exact sequence. If the order of those outcomes was not important, then one would have to calculate the number of ways one could get that mix of numbers and multiply it times that probability.

Auf Wiedersehen,

LCII

[kenwoodallpromos]

You are willing to set up English accounts for us so we can avoid paying taxes on our winnings? That will work for 3 yearsa, then all hell breaks loose with IRS!! Not legal!! We can all move to England and avoid taxes like Sir Richard's ex-wife Liz did legally!! Are you the Marcus Smith who posts on the UK horseracing group?? If so you said on it you lost at Wolfhaven!!LOL!! I would avoid Calder track in FL- too deep too often!