Back the Likely Winner Automation Bot for Horse Racing

[welshtrekker]

Anyone tested what happens if you nominate two selections?

[Dallas]

Anyone tested what happens if you nominate two selections?

I know there is a guy on here who makes good money backing his choosen horse if it trades at low odds using this type of automation, its just a case of having the right selection criteria

[welshtrekker]

Thanks for the feedback.
I was more wondering about what happens as the bot triggers twice.
For example: I have it set for the 13.45 from Chepstow today.
I set the order by order of favouritism on both selections.
I chose the selections tipped by oddschecker as they get it right more than expected.
testing it for a bit today. But curious about how the bot reacts to 2 selections? Will it try and back the same horse twice for example?

I had some weird success combining it with dutching but losses can be small and also big doing it that way.

[Dallas]

You cant set the "Applies to" to both poisition sorted in order of favourtism & nominated selection, it has to be one or the other unless your adding an additional rule type to do one of each?

If you use "Applies to" Guardian Nominated sel 1 you then have to nominate which horse/s you want it to trigger on from the main guardian page - it will then only trigger if one of the nominated horses trades this low

If you use "Applies to" poisition sorted in order of favourtism 1 and increase the number of triggers (use at least a 2 sec re-arm) it will trigger on as many horse that trade this low, to stop it triggering on the same horse more than once add the conditon

"Number of Matched bets condition"
On selection
Is "equal" to 0

[stu410]

Carl...22.10... (1.10 odds) return and lost..

[stu410]

Yes,
Clon 22.30 Our Rachael horse..1.03 return...

[MrDorset]

Hi Dallas I wander if you can help me, I want to add the condition you suggested to someone at the start of this topic -

"Historic Fixed Odds Condition"
Selection by poisition (sorted in order of favourtism) 1
last traded price 5 secs ago is
Less than 1.35

I want to make sure I've added the condition correctly here's a snapshot of my screen. thanks.

[Dallas]

Yes thats absolutly fine - in the slection area you could tick "current" rather than "nominated" as the current is also looking at the fav but it does nt make any real difference it just tidys it up a bit

[MrDorset]

Thanks for your swift reply, cheers

[Crazyskier]

Carl...22.10... (1.10 odds) return and lost..

This is the issue with any of these types of IP strategies, I find. Lots of small wins, only to be wiped out by 2-3 large losses in a day.

I do find more consistency in backing a horse TO PLACE in play; smaller returns of course, but FAR fewer losses.

The liquidity on in-play PLACE market trading is quite considerable lately...

[Crazyskier]

My own particular system only fired in about 40% of races yesterday. Due to the odds presented during the race some races just purely didnt meet the critieria in play.

Now a few people may say thats not good enough, i persoanlly think thats fine as the system is following the rules, if you start chasing for profit it will bite you as you are introducing more risk.

Indeed, better no trade and loss avoidance than a risky one that bites you...

[Seaside Boy]

Have been dabbling with this now for a few weeks & can agree with some of the previous comments.
Tuesday 16:35 Fakenham: had All Together backed @ 1.20 IP, which was then beaten by 5 lengths.
As a previous posted noted - these losses wipe out all of you small gains from other races where you get backed IP @ odds as low as 1.01.
Is anyone making anything out of this strategy & if so, is that pure chance or by design - with some ingenious tweaking to this bot? Would be interested to know.

[novicestakes]

Im running something very similar, although the reverse, so laying the likely loser - but the principle is almost the same. Im currently at 92% success rate.

Whilst Im clearly not going to provide a golden ticket, most of the information on here is fairly correct, and always... always... test things.

I can only concur that 1.2 is still too high for in-play and is still subject to a horse at 1.2 losing (you'll be surprised how many) this can be due to many factors.

My advice is to place with the odds themselves, and lower odds to ensure your have a better chance of being right!

Id also look at timings and relative odds, as two horses could be at 1.2 and 1.22 - nothing in it on the course! Look to set conditions wherby you create distance (in odds terms) between close runners.

[Seaside Boy]

Agree that 1.20 is too high for backing the likely winner IP. Had tried with lower odds (dabbled with 1.10, then 1.12, etc.), but wasn't getting matched - even at 1.01! Suppose it's all about timing - when the likely winner gets traded below 1.10 and then getting a bet matched at 1.01 or above. That's when I upped the odds towards 1.20 - then get burned (only for 2 quid though).
Interesting stats you have about laying the likely loser. Mind me asking what odds parameters you are using to lay? And does the 7ish% of losses outweighing the 90ish% of wins?

[Mikky]

I am managing to get some decent stats (in practice mode), using a variation of this bot, at higher odds than 1.2, but with certain conditions that must be met first and it seems promising. Been testing it for about 5 days now and can see what types of races it seems to have a better strike rate in. Suprisingly it's the opposite types of races to what I imagined!

Obviously a lot more testing to be done yet, but fingers crossed.