The Bookie Demolisher: Overview /Day 1 Selections


The “Bookie Demolisher” system is a horse betting system that is fairly easy to use and suitable for beginners.

System Claims

The author has tested this system for over 2 years with no claims whatsoever that he/she has actually backed the selections that the system produces. The system has clearly been developed by back fitting results over the reviewed period.

To quote the author directly “Prior to commencing research for this system, I set myself 3 aims that I felt had to be met before the system could be considered sufficiently reliable and profitable. Only once these aims had been met, could I feel confident that the system was ready to be released as a serious method for winning from horse racing…………………. The results have been extremely positive……………. If you had backed every selection that the system has produced since June 1st 2007, you would have made the following profits:”

“June 1st 2007 to Dec 31st 2007 – 436.64 points profit = £43,664.00 at £100 stakes”

“2008 – 521.33 points profit = £52,133.00 at £100 stakes”

“2009 to July – 348.91 points profit = £34,890.90 at £100 stakes”

Whilst not all selections will win or place it is claimed “that the results have already been sustained for 26 months without a losing run”.

The System

Is sold for £95 and is presented as a 17 page document, the system itself appears very simple to operate and has no special requirements using a newspaper or Online.

In essence the system covers specific trainers at specific course who not only have a particularly high strike rate but also consistent profits.

Your first 30 days for just £1

There may be occasions when there is more than one selection (as a consequence of qualifying trainers) in a race; these must all be backed using the specified stake, if they meet the specified odds criteria.

Selection Method

  • Look through the list of courses where racing is being held and check if any of these courses are contained within the system list.
  • Check which trainers should be followed at the course.
  • Go through the races to see if there are any horses running that are trained by the qualifying trainers.
  • Back the horses with the relevant stakes

Starting Bank

None specified however, and for the purpose of the review, 1 point will equal £10.

My initial view

Very bold claims for the system and given the name of the product “The Bookie Demolisher”, there is an awful lot to live up to. The system has been created using back fitted data however; there is nothing wrong with this approach if it works over time. That fact that it has been ‘proved’ from June 2007 to July 2009 is a positive.

We will be reviewing the system for the next month so this will give us sufficient time to fully evaluate how the system performs. I suggest that you initially paper trade the selections until you have confidence in the likely success of the system.

Potential Selections in the following races – 27th July 2009

Yarmouth 16:00 x2

Southwell 16:15

Yarmouth 16:30

Yarmouth 17:30 

Windsor 19:45

Windsor 20:15

Windsor 20:45

(Names of runners, and odds stipulations removed to preserve author's material)

Your first 30 days for just £1
13 replies
  1. Ady says:

    Hi Matt

    After looking at these selections, I have already worked out 4 trainers at 3 courses and by the way you are listing the stakes, i can work out what stakes each trainer is to be played at and at what prices.
    Now it is only a matter of time before every reader will do the same as myself and soon have a nice little protfolio of Trainers/Tracks.

    Whilst i like your site and your method of doing things, would you advertise your own (or Gavins) Trainer/Track stats in the exact same way, thus enabling your readers to build up a list for themselves at no charge?

    I have no fiancial interest in the system however, i do honestly feel that you are being rather unfair to the ‘author’ of this system by advertising the selections in this manner.

    Surely it would be in your best interest as affiliate to keep the selections to yourself, then just list the results as Selection 1/2/3 etc. That way people will see the results but if they want the selections, then purchase the system if it proves to be successful.

    Sorry for sounding like a whiner, but i wouldn’t appreciate it if someone advertised my selections for such a simplistic system, or even for my Lay system which is currently operating very well indeed, without first having my confirmation to do so.

    Because of the sheer simplistic nature of the system, i’m pretty sure the author wouldn’t agree with the selections being listed for the same reasons which i have shown.
    If I can ork it out, then I’m sure many others can also.


    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Ady

      You’re absolutely right. There was way too much content in that post.

      I’ve now edited it.


  2. Ady says:

    Thanks Matt, as i said, i’m not a whinger, just a honest Joe Punter.

    And sorry Matt, it wasn’t until i’d posted my ‘essay’ that i noticed it isn’t you, it is John who is conducting the review.

    I hope you accept my apologies.


  3. Matt Bisogno says:

    It’s no problem Ady, and in fairness to John, I’d not been clear enough about how I wanted the review to be presented.

    So, my fault, and all comments fair and reasonable. 🙂


  4. John says:

    Fully agree with Ady’s comments, too much information. In future qualifying courses/races will only appear as per current edit. Subsequent result updates will appear as 1/2/3, (4) if applicable, UNP or NR.

  5. Ady says:

    Thanks for that John,


    Again, i’m not being funny about this, but even with the racetimes published once the results are updated, then that too can be back tracked to give away the selection process and the price/stakes stipulations. (I know that there is at least one no-bet situation as i saw the original post, in fact there WILL be two). Therefore, I and anyone who is prepared to do the groundwork, will find it easy to work out.

    However, with NO race times/meetings listed then there is absolutely no way that anyone can work it out. Thus preventing any copycats gaining the edge at no cost.

    I apologise if I appear to be a nuisance or cause any problems by my statement, but I do feel that the information currently listed is still too much.


  6. Mark says:

    It seems to me that this is going just a little bit over the top; the Sportsworld website lists all 2274 of the bets in spreadsheet form and names the horses, the courses and the outcomes for every bet.

    [link removed]

    Therefore if anyone really wanted to reverse engineer the system they could surely do it from the data provided by the publishers themselves couldn’t they?

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      They probably could indeed Mark. Which is why I emailed Sportsworld yesterday and pointed this out (once it had been pointed out to me by John).

      I think it’s reasonable that if someone goes to the time to research something, then they should have a right to protect themselves to a reasonable degree against intellectual property theft in the form of reverse engineering.

      Of course, the problem comes when one tries to define the word ‘reasonable’ in the above sentence. A further problem, which will be borne out by time, is just how ‘intellectual’ the property is anyway!

      That’s why John will persist with the review, despite the constraints he has to work under this time.

      Best Regards,

  7. John says:

    Hi Ady,

    I don’t think there is an easy answer to this. On the one hand I believe we need to be ‘open’ to external scrutiny when reviewing these systems however, this of course needs to be balanced enough so as to protect the author of the system under review.

    The only occasions where a selection can be identified is if we identify finishing position. So Win will be a giveaway but place could cover 2 or even three horses. UNP will not identify anything neither will ‘non qualifier’. Finally NR may identify if only one NR in the race.

    One could of course just say that there were ‘n’ qualifiers in the day with an update on profit/loss for the day. Personally, that would be far to minimalist for me if I was thinking of purchasing any system based on a review.

    Not an easy problem to resolve.



  8. Dave Dettori says:

    Hi Ady,

    It must be a really simple system to work out and probably not worth the money. Plus I’ve just seen it on e-bay for a £5!

  9. Terry says:

    I would have thought with this site having affiliate rather than direct links, every effort should be made to be transparent in the review process. Especially when so many review sites are set up cash in and spit out the desperate punter.

    Systems are available for sale because people do not have the knowledge or ability to develop their own method of making selections.

    The question why can the systems that hide behind long form sales letters not be scrutinised in the same way tipsters lay themselves on the line by getting proofed????

  10. trevado says:

    there is nothing wrong with this review just look at the SWP site all the info is in in the add plus the complete results of course this is back fitted its just who has 100s of £s a day to invest ,any system that does not publish results is not worth the light of day keep up the good work Matt and coleagues. t.c

Comments are closed.