Three Horses To Back Today…

I'm conscious, dear reader, that I've been very focused on the Geegeez Racing Club this week, and have inadvertantly marginalised all those regular readers who either can't afford or don't want to be a part of that group. Poor show on my part, so as a result, today's post will be pitch-free pure content. 🙂

In fact, July is going to be something of a rest period for me, with a couple of short breaks planned, so there will be no system reviews for the rest of the month. The exception to this will be the final review of The Ultimate Forex Predictor, which I don't mind saying has performed impressively, and even managed to surprise my difficult to please reviewer!

So, today, I've got three horses that will be carrying my cash tonight; a little system that I've been researching; and, of course, a welcome return after a week off for Thursday Fun.


Let's start with my three off the tee (three from the stalls) for this evening.

In the 6.30 at Newbury, a seemingly uninspiring apprentice event, Arab League improved markedly for the big step up in trip last time. Unfavourably drawn wide, and unfancied in the market (33/1) that day at Warwick, he is entitled to show further improvement against what are a moderate and generally exposed bunch. His pilot tonight, Andrea Atzeni, is one of only two in the race with any competence in my opinion and, if he handles the ground and they don't dawdle, Arab League may run on past all of them.

In the 8.10, Gallagher is something of a conundrum. He's head and shoulders above these on form, but does find it hard to win. Mind you, that comment can be levelled against most of his opponents this evening, with one exception, Plum Pudding. Alas, the Pud seems to only win at Newmarket and I'd be happy to take him on here.

Finally, whilst very far from a mortgage job, Arizona John looks too good for the awful oppo in the seller at Redcar (7.15). This would also count as a notch for the seller's system I published here about a month ago. You can remind yourself of that here.

He's been dropping down the weights, and they've been mucking about with his race distances. But tonight, with job jockey Darryl 'Dazzler' Holland on board and over a much more appropriate trip, AJ looks like a winner to me. The rest of them are mostly shocking in truth, and only Wiseman's Diamond and Nchike are rated within a stone and a half of the pick.

Like I say, far from a mortgage job, but by far the most likely winner.


Now, as promised last week and somewhat belatedly, here's another system I've been playing with in my Racing Systems Builder software...

This fun system plays on the notion that weight affects handicap performance based on going. That is, higher weighted horses win more often on firmer ground; lower weighted horses win more often on softer ground.

Your first 30 days for just £1

I say 'fun' system because we're looking at horses priced at 16/1+, which inevitably means some ugly losing runs. But if you were to have followed these for £10 stakes from 2004-2008, you'd have made a very lovely £3,280.


2004  2005  2006  2007  2008

Variable                     Category

Race Type
4+ & all age handicaps
specific age handicaps

Weight Rank - Ascending (handicaps)
1st (bottom weight)

Race Going
heavy or very soft

Odds, Starting Price
16/1 - 31/1
32/1 - 63/1

Horse, Age in Years

2004       6     177     3.39       48.00    27.12
2005       5     167     2.99      -42.00   -25.15
2006      10     149     6.71      238.00   159.73
2007       5     167     2.99      -14.00    -8.38
2008      10     191     5.24       98.00    51.31
TOTAL    36     851     4.23      328.00    38.54

Now, assuming you could get on average 30% better odds (and, at these prices, that's a highly conservative estimate), your profit would rise to £5,606.

You'd be a brave (or rich) man or woman to bet these for bigger stakes, but for £100 a go, that'd be over £56,000!

But, when the rains come, look to the tail end of the handicap and the apparent rags to bring home the riches...


And now for something completely different... I've not seen a lot of Seinfeld but what I have seen, I like. My friends all rave about it, and one particular episode they savour is that of the 'Soup Nazi'. In life, there is a right way and any number of wrong ways...



p.s. Nine shares left in the horse. Link here. No pitch. 😉

Your first 30 days for just £1
6 replies
  1. Peter Colledge says:

    Thanks, Matt. You would like Seinfeld; all of it, right from the start through to the sad finish. It is about nothing, that’s its premise. Seinfeld himself said there’d be no hugging. It’s just four intrepid heroes, all variously flawed, all trying to make do in a big city. Every aspect of what it is to be human is presented in 180 episodes of pure gold. It is THE sitcom; forget about Faulty Towers or Frasier. The only one that comes near is Blackadder4, and that’s only because of the subject matter. I’d even send you a DVD sample if you wish.

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Yes, not terrible Noel, but I was really annoyed that we didn’t get the first one as well. Thought the winner might have lost it in the stewards’ room – he definitely impacted the result. Should have been a nice little treble…

      Oh well, maybe next time..

  2. george richmond says:

    i am trialing a method based on your selling and auction method please let me know if you recieve this message so i can give you more info cheers george r

  3. John Shufflebottom says:

    Hi Matt,

    Just to let you know that I want to thank you for the 21 day ‘Lay system’ trial.
    However I won’t be taking up the subscription. As you say yourself it’s not for everyone… Toilet rolls have been at the top of the shopping list for three weeks… but I do appreciate you giving me/us the chance to find out!
    Somehow backing to win and loosing don’t seem so bad… all in the mindl I suppose?

    Just can’t stand the pace sorry.

    I’ve canceled the Paypal payment.

    Again … thanks again Matt. it’s been interesting if nerve racking.

    John Shufflebottom.

Comments are closed.