Betfair Conspiracy Review

Betfair Conspiracy Review

Betfair Conspiracy

Betfair Conspiracy

It comes as something of a surprise, dear reader, to find that Betfair Conspiracy, the latest manual off the 'wonder system' production line is actually not bad. In fact, it might even be quite good.

For a change, there's no grammatical errors in Betfair Conspiracy.

For a change, there is reasonable rationale to the Betfair Conspiracy rules.

For a change, Betfair Conspiracy actually might work!

Betfair Conspiracy is a place backing system designed to have very short losing runs, and costs £37.

I ran the general rules through a systems checker tool and, although I couldn't specifically check each rule, I did get a warm feeling about the potential of this one.

Going through the racing today, I identified two horses that met the criteria. And this is how they fared:

3.30 Banjaxed Girl - 1.43 - WON (won the race)

4.50 Whizaar - 1.94 - WON (finished 2nd and therefore placed)

A promising enough start, for sure, but what about the likelihood of long-term profitability?

Well, I'd say it's pretty good.

You see, this system requires the user to actually delve into the form a little. It's all explained, and all required data are available on the website.

Whilst undertaking this rudimentary form study, I actually found myself thinking that the horse had a better / worse chance than the betting suggested. In other words, my confidence in selections increased when the (common sense) rules were satisfied.

Now a word of caution. The rules are not really subject to interpretation, but they DO require some focus and time to work through. To review today's four cards, for instance, took me around 35 minutes.

If you've got no time available, then this won't be for you. But if you do have, say, an hour a day when you're betting to work through the rules, you might well have a lot of fun AND make some money with Betfair Conspiracy.

As with all Clickbank products, if you're not happy, you've got sixty days to claim a refund, so you're covered in that regard.

Take a look at the Betfair Conspiracy (and ignore the stupid name!) here.

[N.B. I cannot vouch the immediate upsell after purchase, so my advice would be to scroll down to the bottom of the page, where it says 'No Thanks', and click that link.]

Your first 30 days for just £1
32 replies
  1. DAVE says:

    For a change, there’s no grammatical errors in Betfair Conspiracy

    Surely you mean ‘There ARE no grammatical errors”?

  2. Harvey says:

    Hi Matt,

    I see you like all the other affliates have jumped on this latest band waggon.

    Although you have given a positive report on this system it is the same script that dozens of affliiates are using and therefore to my mind it dilutes any actual testing that you may have done with the system.

    I would be interested in buying it but really don’t know what to believe after reading so many reviews that are obviously sent out to affliates as marketing materials.

    I have yet to find just one actual true independant review.

    Please can you give your honest opinion of this system and not the hype that you have been provided with.

    Your opinion on various systems has been appreciated in the past.

    Kind regards.


    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Harvey

      I’m not sure how long you’ve been reading Geegeez, though I note that you’ve found use in some of my previous reviews.

      I can assure you that ALL of my reviews are 100% independent. I write what I think about systems.

      Please note that this doesn’t make me right, and I’m not clairvoyant. Note also that – despite a system working for me – it may not be to every bettor’s tastes. That’s why I try to highlight downsides so that people can make an informed decision, even when I like a system.

      In this case, for instance, Betfair Conspiracy requires time to identify the selections. Consequently, those readers who are time poor may not find this to be the best product for their tastes.

      Finally, I wouldn’t dream of reproducing a script on this ‘ere blog. I might make the odd (perhaps very odd!) grammar or spelling error, but the uniqueness of the content herein is a source of great pride to me.

      I hope that clarifies.


  3. Paul says:

    Matt, the sales page for Betfair Conspiracy reads very similar to the Five Minute Profits system which sells for £29.
    Any plans to review this ?

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      No plans to review Five Minute Profits at this stage, Paul, but I’ll add it to the wishlist page, and hope to get to it at some point.


  4. Sam says:

    No grammatical errors? Surely “no” implies the singular – “none, nil, no” can not be plural – so it should read “there is no grammatical error”
    Yours pedantically……

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hoho, I’m absolutely delighted to read how you’re all such excellent employers of the language, and that you all pay such close attention to my posts!

      I do hope that, grammatical inexactitude aside, you found something of utility in the words, assuming you could understand my meaning from those awful misappropriations…!



      p.s. there are various correct spellings of the phrase, at least according to the occasionally correct online encyclopedia, Wikipedia:

      Indeed, it may (or may not) be interesting to note that ‘hoisted’ is around fifteen times more than common than ‘hoist’ in all but the US. I’m boring myself here…!

  5. David Dickinson says:

    hi matt
    are you putting this system into your betting portfolio?

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi David

      I’ll be tracking it for a while yet, but if it performs as I think it might, then yes. I’ll report over the coming days / weeks on how it’s going.


  6. david w says:

    Well done Matt

    I’ve been looking at this and wondering “what if…”. If you think there’s merit in it then its worth taking seriously, so maybe I will.

    If all the others have time to comment on grammar etc, maybe they could come up with a nice system for all of us…?

    Still, caveat emptor, as I like to say

    Cheers for everything


  7. Peter says:

    Have to be honest and say that Ian gives a much better appraisal and honest view of this product… and I for one won’t be buying it!

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Now look here Peter, frankly you’ve rattled my cage.

      I NEVER EVER, EVER give anything other than my full, frank and honest opinions in reviews. Do you really think I’d sell my loyal readership down the river for what might amount to a thousand dollars in affiliate commissions? If you do, then I’m afraid you’re not on the same planet as me. I’m interested in building a sustainable business where people trust me, because they know I only tell it as it is.

      I also did research, and I can tell you that there isn’t a database on the planet that you could run the system rules through and get a ‘chapter and verse’ view on the likely profitability of Betfair Conspiracy. I can also tell you that when I ran as close as possible through Adrian Massey’s system tool, I found that these kind of horses placed at over 80% under both codes (as opposed to just flat, which you website man did).

      Regarding the website you quoted (name removed – he gets no free publicity from me), if you search through his back pages, you’ll see he’s had many a pop at me. Seems he doesn’t like me, but loves to quote me. I’m quite flattered by that, in a weird sort of way.

      Bottom line Peter: you’ve been reading my stuff for ages, so you should have decided whether or not to trust me by now. If you choose not to, that’s fine. But please, please, please don’t question my integrity, as that upsets me greatly.

      The product I gave a thumbs up to comes with a 60 day refund guarantee. Just buy the bloody thing (through someone else’s link!) and test it rather than slating me here. I am infuriated.

      Rant over.


  8. Dean says:

    I think you have to do the maths again, Matt.

    At the probable average odds and probable strike rate this method will make losses. Of course, I say “probable” so early profits may be possible…but long term this will (IMHO) haemorrhage cash.

    Of course…we haven’t even started on another 500 people betting in the place market on the same horses!

    I would advise caution and a long period of paper trading before coming to the same decision.

    In the meantime, place lay the overbet selections for value.


    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Dean,

      Please refer to my comments to Peter Vos. If you have the system, which I assume you do (you should if you’re making comments such as this!), then run the points that can be run through Adrian Massey, and come back to me.

      I respect others’ opinions, of course. That doesn’t mean I have to agree with them.

      Terms like haemorrhage are inappropriate.

      I can tell you that there was no impact on the horses being backed. We’re betting short priced horses, and the average liquidity on these beasts will comfortably accommodate those that want to play.


  9. Bruce says:

    Hi Matt.

    I saw yesterday a webpage about OPM (other peoples money). This is a place only system,it seems to use 8 runner races. It claims a 7 loser streak and a 13 winner streak. It is by subscription. It comes from What Really Wins Money. Have you heard of it? It s claimed profits are not outrageous, they are steady.

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Not heard of it Bruce, but I know the guys at Canonbury Publishing are reliable, and honour their refunds, so you could paper trade it and refund if it’s not for you.


  10. Dean says:

    No probblem, Matt. The whole of the racing industry, indeed all sports, is based around opinion. I used the word haemorrhage because it is my opinion (IMHO) and I couldn’t spell diar..dhioreer… diorar….an upset tummy.

    As you guessed, the AM site is the basis of my comments and it seems we differ somewhat.

    Of course, I will be the first to come back and share a portion of humble pie with Peter, LOL, should you be correct. Perhaps we should make a date for lunch! 😀

  11. Brian says:


    I’m appalled!!!!
    This is not like you having a rant!!!
    Still it shows we all have our breaking point!
    Keep up the good work I’ll monitor before making any investment.



    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Ha, thanks Brian. Yes, a rare hissy fit from yours truly. In fact, I’ve had a bit of a laugh about it in today’s post!


  12. Peter says:

    Matt/Dean… and I will buy lunch if this system is profitable long term!

    Matt, not having a go at you at all, its just that these systems infuriate me when they are continually dumped on the gullible punters!

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      It infuriates me too Peter, but I receive over a dozen emails every time they are released, so I know people want to know if they’re any good.

      We both know – in fact, everybody knows! – that mostly they’re… excrement. But occasionally, despite the preposterous rhetoric and the abject ‘silver bullet’ sales copy/videos, the actual product is half decent or better. In my opinion, this is one of those rare instances. In my opinion…

      Incidentally, one of the other side effects of BF Conspiracy might be that those who fail the method on numerous counts become place lay material. Park Lane (BSP 2.07) is a case in point.


  13. Jake says:

    Matt and all

    I cant understand why anyone who devises a systen that’s profitable would want to sell it.

    I have discovered a few indicators whereby if appropriate the horse will in all probability lose.

    I would not tell anyone about them NEVER MIND a system that will make you money and all for 39 quid!

  14. maneman says:

    Suggest you take a look at this.

    [Link to same blog as before removed]

    It’s a conspiracy alright!!

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi maneman,

      As I’ve already said, this guy has had about four pops at me in the last year, and frankly never taken the trouble to speak to me. He infers that nobody can be both a businessman and a punter, and yet he never mentions any of my analyses (for instance, yesterday’s Arkle preview or last week’s Grand National preview – the latter of which, incidentally, was published in full in the Irish Field newspaper under my name – am I really just a businessman?!)

      Moreover, he says he ran the rules through a system. I’m sorry but he can only have run the race types through. By doing that, he is ignoring nine of the eleven rules, all of which are designed to filter out ‘bad’ favourites.

      The average price may well be 1.4 or thereabouts, but the strike rate will be much higher than 70% (as quoted by Ian), in my opinion.

      Sorry, but this guy says he’s not a salesman and yet his very short list of recommended products includes all of his own…

      A different opinion doesn’t make me wrong. You will choose who you want to trust, and that’s fine by me. But note that Ian – like everyone else with an online presence – wants to sell you stuff. He shouldn’t cry about the fact that he’s not very good at it!

      Enough already.


  15. maneman says:

    I note your comments with much interest and certainly as far as I am concerned your integrity remains intact.
    I like many others appreciate your good work.


  16. colin says:

    Can I come to lunch as well (too,also or whatever)

    In the meantime, anyone seen the £9.95 2nd favs system being touted.

    Claims £3000 in a month, £32oo in 4 months no silly staking, loss recover, just laying selected 2 nd favourites.

    The author shows detailed results.

    You dont need to buy it.

    £3000 made in one month thus virtually nothing in other 3! Indeed there is a long period where a loss was made.
    It is not £50 stakes but £150. It appears it is £50 first bet increasing by £50 on 2 and 3 if they are winners. Maximum stake £150

    It appears the selection process is max price BF 3.75.
    If I have interpreted it right when you have enjoed a 1 point win, then a 2 point win, then your stake on the 3 rd is 3 points and your loss is over 8 points if the 3rd bet is a losing lay i.e. over a sequence of 3 a loss of 5 points which @£50 is £250

    I have not made a detailed break down, but a skim through suggests a 70% strike rate meaning probably a break even or perhaps a loss at level stakes.

    It relies on longish sequencies of 3 point wins – but there has been long losing sequences, as much as 6 I seem to remember, you hit this early on in the system and you could soon lose.It also looks like 6 bets a day on average and as it is progressive staking will need a lot of computer time – unless there is a bot than could cope with it.

    It is not a con, as the results are there, but be warned – it is not the £750 per week profit suggested, nor is it £50 stakes.

    If anyone has bought it – it is VERY cheap I would appreciate hearing whether my analysis is correct. If it is not, I will post an apology here to the systems author

    After all I I don’t want to be hoisted up anyones petard, but I may well be hoist on my own(Matt I think it is to do with the word prior to H….. up and on are different types of word I believe, not that I suppose you really care anymore!)

Comments are closed.