Simply The Best – Final Review

First of all, let me apologise for the later than originally intended final review of this system. One of the reasons for this was that I wanted to undertake an additional and final 7 day off page review of the system.

System Claims

The author (Bernard Hibbert) has "researched" (back-fitted) this system over the past 2 National Hunt seasons:

Total Qualifiers = 532

Winners = 199

Strike Rate = 37.5%

Profit to SP = 753 points

ROI = 142%

Mode of Operation

The system itself is very simple to operate and has no special requirements so your favourite newspaper or an online service (Racing Post or Sporting Life) should be sufficient to identify potential qualifiers. The system is only to be used during the main National Hunt season (November to April inclusive) at specified UK courses.  The system is based on trainers and/or jockey combinations at these specified courses.

System Results – 1st November to 30th November 2009

Total Qualifiers = 46

Winners = 9

Second = 7

Third = 2

4 weeks' free access to Geegeez Gold

Non-runners = 1

Unplaced = 27

Strike Rate = 20%

Total Stakes = £ 450.00

Total Return = £ 322.34

Loss to SP = - 12.766 points (- £ 127.66)


The system costs £95 (apparently the "standard" price for a Sportsworld system these days) for a 5 page document.  During the review period the performance of the system was poor.

Whilst a review of  a month is probably the minimum period for basing a firm judgement on a particular system, I would be happy at this stage to give the system the thumbs down. Back-fitted systems are fine if they stand the test of time however, one of the prime stumbling blocks for this type of system is that "success" in the past is no guarantee of success in the future. This system would appear to be yet another example of this.

Stop Press - additional review (1st - 6th December 2009)

Total Qualifiers = 18

Winners = 4

Second = 2

Third = 3

Unplaced = 9

Strike Rate = 22.22%

Total Stakes = £ 180.00

Total Return = £ 217.50

Profit to SP = 3.75 points (£ 37.50)

A profit in the mini review but not enough in terms of strike rate for me to change my original opinion. If you have already purchased the system then could I suggest you paper trade for a while for signs of improvement/increased strike rate before you commit further cash to the bookies' satchels.

Happy punting


4 weeks' free access to Geegeez Gold
5 replies
  1. Ian Potts says:

    1 month reviews are pointless. The number of times I have seen systems that are claimed to be ‘failed’ after 1 month when I’ve achieved annual profits from them. Even good systems can be expected to fail 3 months in 12 and good systems have poor years because that’s a fact of life. Stop attributing every so called failed system after a month a failure because the past results are considered ‘back fitted’. To condemn past results as back fitted is not appropriate with these rules, the author is either telling lies or the truth. You can see why the system had a bad month. We went from firm ground in October to soft/heavy in November. All the top trainers are currently slow into their stride

    And of course what happens from Saturday – 13 selections 4 wins at- 2.17, 3.02, 8.26, 11.24 which I make 11 points profit in 2 days at Betfair SP after 5% reduction.

    I’m always pleased when reviewers finish their reviews, the system might then start to turn back into profit.

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Ian

      Thanks for your comments, and I assume you have something to do with Simply The Best.
      Whilst I generally agree that one month trials are inconclusive, they do give a good indication of the relative merits and otherwise of a system. So it’s not right to say they’re pointless.

      Backfitting is a serious problem in our game, as you’ll know if you’ve been around for long. I’m afraid I don’t know anything about you, so I’m struggling to fit a response to your points.

      I’d welcome the opportunity to discuss further, if you feel the review is harsh.


      p.s. John is an excellent and, in my opinion, very fair reviewer. For previous systems, he’s actually revisited them in subsequent months to provide an update on performance, so – again – we’re trying to give as fair an indication as possible, albeit bound by the constraints of writing a blog that operates in a fast-moving world.

  2. John says:

    Hi Ian,

    Thanks for your comments, I believe Matt has commented back in a fair and reasoned manner. However, as the reviewer I would like to add a few observations of my own:

    1. Your point on change of going is irrelevant. The “system” which you clearly have access, did not specify only bet X when the going is Y.

    2. The going in October then changing in November is again irrelevant. The core National Hunt season is, in the main, a winter sport so expect the going to be a lot softer. Indeed both meetings on the Saturday to which you refer were defined as “Heavy” yet winners were identified.

    3. Nicky Henderson had a 50% strike rate over the past few weeks but according to the “system” he was not an identified Trainer to follow at a lot of the courses he had winners at. Paul Nichols has also been flying having earned over 1 million already, again not a selected trainer in a number of circumstances.

    Finally, and I believe more fundamental to the success of a system, the defined parameters have to be accurate. In at least one instance a particular trainer at a particular course had to be backed in all Hurdle races. This informations was incorrect as that particular trainer’s successes at said course were in Chases.

    I will continue to monitor the system and will provide a further update in the New Year. If this is indeed the elusive “Holy Grail” then you and every other loyal reader of Geegeez will certainly hear about it. Until then, best of luck in punting.

  3. Eileen Dale says:

    Is trainertrackstats not based on back-fitting / past results or am i missing something? Simply The Best has very similar selections to TTS so maybe Simply The Best is worth taking the test of time. 3 Month reviews would be more realistic/true reflection of the system.

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Eileen

      TTS trainers have to satisfy at least one of these four key criteria to ensure that the sampled data is as reliable as possible:

      1. At least 20 winners with the subset in question in the last five seasons
      2. 40%+ strike rate with the subset in question in the last five seasons
      3. Level stake profit of at least 30 points with the subset in question over the last five seasons
      4. A profit per runner of at least 125% with the subset in question over the last five seasons

      Moreover, to prevent one 25/1 winner skewing the stats, only horses priced 14/1 or shorter qualify.

      Is this back-fitting? No, I don’t believe so. The fact that the product has made profit in every one of its three seasons on sale to date. If Simply The Best, or indeed any other product, could make this claim alone, it would be due a huge amount more respect.

      I hope you consider the above fair, despite the fact that my previous involvement in TTS renders me extremely biased. 😉


Comments are closed.