Two Horse Per Race Method
Nick Mordin is a name that will be familiar to most of us who are interested in systems and betting, and he is someone for whom I have a great regard. His approach, though, is highly individual. Roughly speaking, he advocates taking a view that goes against the crowd as being the best way to obtain value in betting. In the ancient two-runner Aesop Fable Listed Stakes, he would have been, I'm sure, the only punter there to back the tortoise against the hare! And at good odds too, while I would have lumped onto the odds-on favourite. Therein lies the problem - it is easy to get carried away by the known form of the hare, while that of the tortoise is clearly far less attractive. So what Mordin would suggest is a kind of lateral thinking; not going for the obvious, but looking for a profitable angle that might not be apparent to one and all.
I once wrote a little verse that sums this up. I do claim responsibility for the verse, though not for the idea behind it. Here goes: "A cannibal and his young son were out in the jungle one day, When there in a clearing before them, a gorgeous young nude lady lay. Said the son, 'Come on, Father, let's grab her. Take her home and we all shall be fed.' f ed.' Said the father, 'Yes, son, we'll take her. But we'll eat your mother instead!" See what I mean? Profitable lateral thinking.
But to return to racing. A basic rule that I've seen laid down in countless systems is avoid like the plague all races confined to apprentices only, amateurs only, or lady riders only. The thinking behind it is obvious, too obvious. Thinking laterally, one may come up with an idea that could turn out to be profitable because of the value available by going against the masses. So, instead, we look very carefully at such races for the following good reason. Within the ranks of apprentices, amateurs, and lady riders there is an extremely wide range of ability, particularly perhaps, in the amateurs and ladies. To put it bluntly, there
are a few very good riders among them, and the majority are well below that standard. Therefore, if we see a second or third favourite ridden by one of the few good riders and the favourite has one of the rest on board, then we have a real value bet. You can readily work out for yourself the few riders to be followed and the others to be avoided.
Our little joke today concerns two ageing jockey friends who wouldn't fit into any of the foregoing categories. These were retired old pros, Billy and Sam, who were inclined after a drink or three to have discussions of a distinctly philosophical nature. In particular, they liked to consider the possibility of a life hereafter, and whether in that heavenly after-life there would exist horse racing, as known to them and enjoyed by them here on earth. They sincerely and fervently hoped there would.
Sadly, Billy died of a heart attack, leaving his friend Sam grieving and alone. Then, one night in bed, Sam was wakened by a strange sound and a ghostly light at the foot of his bed. Slowly, the light took the shape of his old friend Billy, and the sound became Billy's voice talking excitedly. "Sam, there is a heaven and I've gone there. And there's racing there too. Oh, Sam, and what racing it is! The going is always perfect and every horse is a real thoroughbred that runs straight and true to form in every race. There's no Stewards' Enquiries, no bans or suspensions and every jockey is guaranteed a big win every week or so."
"That's
fantastic,
wonderful,
magnificent!" shouted Sam. "There's just one snag, though," said Billy sombrely. "You're booked for a ride next Saturday." The system this time is in two parts. The first part gives us two horses per race, and in part two this is narrowed down to occasional single selections. The
originator suggests using the betting forecast of the Daily Mirror or Daily Mail. I would strongly advocate that of the Racing Post instead. Having dug it out of my files recently, I decided to give it a trial in present-day conditions. In the short spell that I checked it, I was pleasantly surprised by the results. I hope that you will be too.
Two Per Race Method
1. Note the first three horses named in the betting forecast. 2. Delete the one with the worst form figure last time out - current season's form. 3. Horses which have not run during the current season are counted as being unplaced last time out - except 4. Those making their racecourse debut in a race in which at least 4 horses have run before (current or previous season). These are counted as having won last time out. Otherwise, these debutants are counted as having been unplaced. 5. Where two horses have the same form figure, delete the one quoted at the longest odds. E.g. 3rd in the forecast that won last time out, with both 1st and 2nd in the forecast that were unplaced last time, the second quoted would be deleted. 6. Where all three have the same placing, then the 3rd quoted is deleted. 7. Whilst forecast prices may vary according to the paper used, there is usually a large measure of agreement on the names of the first three, which is the basis of this idea. So you should safely be able to use your usual daily. Even when there are several meetings, a minute will usually suffice to name the horses selected. However, to avoid any possibility of confusion, any advertised results will be based upon the Daily Mirror, or if the Mirror is not published, the Daily Mail.
This essentially simple idea combines three basic statistics. Firstly, around 75% of all winners come from the first three in the betting forecast. Secondly, 1st placings last time out produce more winners than 2nds, which in turn produce more than 3rds, with 4ths remaining a poor fourth. Thirdly, horses
making their racecourse debut and quoted in the first three in the betting forecast in a race in which at least four horses have run before produce a steady stream of winners under both codes. Sometimes they drift from their forecast price and start at longish odds. The other day, one quoted 2nd in the betting at 100/30 won at 16/1. Whilst day-to-day results will vary, unless many years' statistics become meaningless, the idea will produce a large number of winners. However, the best chance of profitability is to be selective. A good idea would be to confine bets to those races in which at least one of the two qualifiers won, or counted as won, last time out. On the basis of previous returns this should approximately halve the number of bets, but retain a high percentage of the winners.
Occasional One Horse Bets
In those Non-Handicaps only where one only of the two horses indicated by the original rules won or counted as won last time out, and is quoted in the betting forecast at 3/1 or more, this horse is considered a one horse bet.
The statistics mentioned previously show that, of all the form figures, winners last time out have the highest success rate. The figure is improved if taking Non-Handicaps only. Races in which only one of the two original qualifiers won or counted as won last time out should both further enhance the rate and considerably reduce the number of bets. The minimum forecast requirement will also considerably reduce the number of bets, as in most cases where there is only one qualifier, it will be quoted at less than 3/1. The forecast stipulation also ensures that a relatively small percentage of winners are required to produce a profit. Some days there will not be a bet, on others usually one or two. Level stakes is suggested at all times. As with the original method, the Mirror, if absent the Mail, will be used to determine bets.
