不怕練馬師轉手法,轉existing馬房或騎師,易不須倚靠個人判斷的方法

I think it can only be achieved by very good analysis or betting information

as I dont have the knowledge on horse analysis and stable information, I concentrate on betting information.

If you look into winning horse pattern, you may find that large bet amount at last few minutes, in this siutation, only you have good insight can save yourself.

and like the Whyte holding horses cases, good horse information will make yourself losing also.  So, betting information is the only way to save you from betting onto this.  I believe that this reflect in betting info.

This is a dilemma, and it is the world that we are living in.

Hey bro, I like calculus when I was studying, so you are not alone wor!

[ 本帖最後由 whatchee 於 30-1-2007 11:25 AM 編輯 ]

Hi, whatchee brother,
I think what you mean is that bet information and horse/stable information can support each other.  Yes, I agree with that.

The reason that I don't focus on bet system is that some brother said (I forgot who) the insiders always bet on the final minutes.  And stable guys always bet in some pattern that makes you not notice, and may change their method periodically.  You also need a sophistic system to see their pattern like super rucrazy did), and it may not be that quantative.  I don't mean that it's not useful.  I just mean you need great program/maths and careful thinking to help you in odd analysis, and for this, I don't have.

This is the reason that I'm still going for the latter.  As you're working on the former, maybe we can support each other to some extent.

For Whyte case, I believe it shows that you shouldn't bet too HEAVILY on certain race.  But in general, if you find certain formula or logic that can be evenly applied to all races, it can still drives profit.  So, apart from betting information, even/distributed betting can also save us from that (e.g. bet more than 1 horse per race, which I'm always doing).

...yeah that was really a joke. It kind of reminded me when my brother-in-law got into the med school at HKU. I said 仁者無敵 to him and wish him to become a good doctor.

Well, that's all history. Since then I had given that name to my son.

Horse-punting? That means betting on horses and win money. I am sorry that I should be typing in Chinese but I did not learn that skill at teenage. Now it is hard to teach an old dog with new trick.

Frankly, I really like your  ideas of finding a way or formula to beat the races. Let me share some of my experiences with you here:

Firstly, let me guess your age.  You must not be too old because old bats don't use internet. You also must not be too young, young ones would not bet on horses, their concept of studying the form is beyond them. You and me belong to the cyber age. And Cyber age are mostly well-educated.

When I began punting, there were two main schools of thought to beat the races. Some people only studies weight and class and others are 'time' students. Weight&Class were a Aust/english approach while Time was used mainly by Americans. As a young guys with a science/math background, I spent time to study these two on top of my own 2 approaches--'Application of Game Theory in Horseracing' and ' Collapse of Super-position and probability wave function used in Horse Racing'.

The first two were popular among everyone and we discussed a lot at internet forum ( BBS era!). My own two approaches were never got understood because they involved too much maths and theories. Among the two popular topics, the Time students were really crazy; they would study the speed of wind, the hardness of the tracks and who-who could ride 1/100 sec faster.... The Time students would say the class&weught students were not scientific etc etc.....I can tell you now, they are all broke. However, is Time-stydying really useless? The answer is no. Time can e useful if you know how to apply it and factor it. One common observation from anywhere is that good horses can all run good times. But how come the Time students all went broke....?

I then studied the HK races and the focus of most people was on trainers and jockeys, rather than on a horse's ability. All I can say is that, if you are betting on their mind ( go or no-go), you might as well give it up and play lotto. So I never got too involved in those data-mining on Jockey-Trainer stats.....I am not saying they are all wrong but it is just not my cup of tea.

So, keep it up with your studies. You will learn a lot on the way to become a better punter.

引用:

原帖由 real 於 30-1-2007 03:41 PM 發表
...yeah that was really a joke. It kind of reminded me when my brother-in-law got into the med school at HKU. I said 仁者無敵 to him and wish him to become a good doctor.

Well, that's all histor ...

Brother real,

Thanks for your info.  Again, it's very different from others and it makes my crazy idea of opening this topic being worthwhile.

In your message, you mentioned that there were 2 main theories for calculation - Time theory and Weight&Class theory.  All involves very complicated maths.  I know your approach is to use these sophisticated maths to calculate the outcome.  But for me, my actual study is not based on complicated maths, but my focus is to make the main factors under consideration to be quantative - become numbers, and using some simple maths to find their co-relation.  I, as you guess, is so old that I have already returned my maths knowledge to my past teachers.  I just remember simple arithmetics.

On the other hand, I believe that the most important facts should not need using complicated maths to calculate.  If you becomes too fine-tuned, it'll become super data-mining.  In hk, maybe due to the tight competition status, including horses, tracks and tactics, or even may due to bribes,  my believe is that we can only filter out impossible horses + find out all horses that are planned to win and bet on all these possible horses.

Actually, I didn't give up Time, Weight&Class theory.  Maybe I use it in a simple way at the moment - using the speedmap to filter out bad horses.  If I have other findings, I'll go for other factors.  In fact, I didn't go for stable analysis for the past few years.  Only from this year onwards, I start on stable analysis (as it's not that scientific) but the result is, surprising to me, that stable analsysis is worthy and drive winning results.  As mentioned, I believe it's due to the fact that races in hk is very close and heavily rely on tactics once the horses skills are close.

I didn't mean you're wrong (actually I believe you're right, but we may belong to different groups).  I just mean that I'm focussing on "many aspects" instead of "single aspect" and I'm not good enough for complicated maths.  I'm trying to quantify the factors (which is generic) and find any worthy aspect to study on.

[ 本帖最後由 小胖 於 30-1-2007 04:22 PM 編輯 ]

Wow!         ' Collapse of Super-position

I am not maths student, so not heard of it, may REAL show me the road to know more?  I will try search in internet myself
anyway.  if I know these can help in my wallet, I should have studied them in schools.

I believe game theory works, as I study betting information in these few months.   patterns are definitely there.

I think horse is the best place to bet to my knowledge so far, as far as you can de-cipher the code in horse racing.

About typing in English, I am an old dog too, just too impatient to type or write in Chinese, it is a big computer joke to me.  

After several months of study, I find that horse betting actually similar to  people playing forex, different schools of people use different methods, trying to achieve profit at the same time.  and at the background, some big sharks manipulate information and rate, trying to kill all small fish.

This is a crazy world.

引用:

原帖由 whatchee 於 30-1-2007 04:28 PM 發表
Wow!         ' Collapse of Super-position

I am not maths student, so not heard of it, may REAL show me the road to know more?  I will try search in internet myself
anyway.  if I know these ca ...

Whatchee brother,

Can you tell me what "game theory" is??  Maybe just a brief description.

I like this kind of discussion, not just tips, you know.

[ 本帖最後由 小胖 於 30-1-2007 04:48 PM 編輯 ]

I didnt study game theory , it should be probability and actions to protect significant losses

once, someone is discussing which one is heavier, M16 or AK47 in a chat, and I got the answer,

can you think of the reason?

the answer is : yahoo


that's right, the greatest invention in our lifetime

慢用

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

:smile_15:

one reason that I say there is pattern, see the calculated ratio,
pure calculation, no stable, jockey, horse characteristics...etc

Whatchee,

I happen to start liking you ( ie quoted from a Chow Sin Chee TV show).
That 'Collapse of Superposition' etc etc was also meant to be a joke and my wife still makes fun of me till now. Since it is a nice day, I think I will share the background of this.

Not sure if you had heard about a thought experience of putting a cat in the box and there is a poison gas flask in it as well. A hammer is connected to a particular detector and if will break the flasj and kill the cat if the particle spins up or vice versa. Yes the Sch Cat argument. Until we open the box, we would have no knowledge to which the cat is alive or dead, hence the cat is in a super-position , being alive and dead at the same time until the box is opened.  Doesn't it sound similar to where a horse is positioned before and after the gate opens??!! Before the starter hits the button, all horses are in 'super-positions' and there locations during the race is best described ( and hence predicted ) by the wave function. I had this similar idea and purposed some wonderful thought ( not on horses, though) to my supervisor as my PH.D. thesis. And the Professor jokingly suggested that I could do that on race-track to save research funding to set it up in the LAB.

No, it has never formed in any sense at all for the horse-punting but the idea sounds cool, doesn't it?

Ha Ha Ha

It reminds me of quantum physics,  a particle can be anywhere at the same time, you cannot detect its position and speed at the same time.

so a horse can win or loss at the same time, not until we impose the constrain, i.e. the finish time.

that is why everyone's heart is going up and down, 7 bucket up, 8 bucket down :smile_13:

not until the finish time reached, then all buckets falled to the ground :em36:



Ha Ha, may be we need to apply quantum physics to horse racing other than Biology, physics, probability, game theory, super-position collapse :em25:

It is a good paradox actually, will learn more :33: