Bill Benter / Allan Woods/ Zeljko Ranogajec - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK harm-plan harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Bill Benter / Allan Woods/ Zeljko Ranogajec - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Bill Benter / Allan Woods/ Zeljko Ranogajec  (Read 3961 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-29, 11:50 AM Reply #50 »
Betting in the current day is no doubt completely different and you probably do need to have programming skills etc  to bet against the likes of Z , where he receives rebates, but for those 30 years one did not, in fact a young eccentric, now deceased Tim Walsh, like his brother David, was just coming on the scene on behalf of Z and his team betting with laptops  as I was winding down .

You "probably" need programming skills?

Define probably? All I'm asking is for someone to demonstrate some knowledge of programming skills and maybe I can even try for some detail in what they do with these programming skills to overcome a 15%-20% takeout of the parimutuel pools in Australia. Don't be afraid of bamboozling me. I program in C++, Python, Perl, Assembler - so nothing is likely to be above my skill set and if it is I can ask someone who would know.

Just a few lines of code would do and  demonstration that you actually know what these lines of code do.

And when chucking in the term "rebates" (loosely), some demonstration of knowledge that rebates can only be delivered from the TAB margin - they cannot rebate the government's cut - there is clear evidence in previous posts that some people commenting do not know the difference.

And please guys. Specific answers only.

Not "I did this" and "I did that" or "I heard this" or "I heard that", or "Z and the Walshes probably do this" and "aren't they brilliant".

Is it too much to ask for a bit of granularity?

If you cannot be granular then please do not feel obliged to answer.

Offline JWesleyHarding

  • Group 1
  • User 231
  • Posts: 20337
« 2020-Aug-29, 12:15 PM Reply #51 »
And that doesn't mean that A heard it off B who heard it off C....etc.


I've just read the last dozen or so posts  and now ask the important question

Shouldn't the above be "heard it from" rather than "heard it off"?

 :chin:

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-29, 12:30 PM Reply #52 »
I've just read the last dozen or so posts  and now ask the important question

Shouldn't the above be "heard it from" rather than "heard it off"?

 :chin:

Or is it "have heard it from" rather than "heard it from"?


Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-29, 03:04 PM Reply #53 »

Gwenda's horse in Race 2 at Kembla. Liked the way she finished off her trial. Got a little bit of a bite this morning then back out.

Didn't run a bad race for a $150 shot fours - not beaten far. And I'll have to take a look at the head on but think it might have gone to the line having to be held due to crowding.

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 6873
« 2020-Aug-29, 05:50 PM Reply #54 »
Lots of misconceptions around.

I place my bets in seconds and Excel is all I need to do so.

The same bets if done by hand in a TAB would take hours and it would not be pleasant.

This is a real advantage for me but the excel knowledge required is not great. There are lots of ways one can generate tab lines of betting code within Excel and no doubt some are better and more flexible than others. PP7 you seem stuck on the illusion that advanced knowledge in mathematics and or programming is required. It simply is not so.

Fours



Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-29, 06:33 PM Reply #55 »
Lots of misconceptions around.

I place my bets in seconds and Excel is all I need to do so.

The same bets if done by hand in a TAB would take hours and it would not be pleasant.

This is a real advantage for me but the excel knowledge required is not great. There are lots of ways one can generate tab lines of betting code within Excel and no doubt some are better and more flexible than others. PP7 you seem stuck on the illusion that advanced knowledge in mathematics and or programming is required. It simply is not so.

Fours

No illusion here fours.

If you want to record your bets or generate lines then by all means use a spreadsheet.

We are talking about something a few degrees more complex than that however.

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 6873
« 2020-Aug-29, 07:47 PM Reply #56 »
PP7,

Is the complexity worth it?

My simple stuff is generating a a bigger % profit than most would believe on turnover this week from 53 bets to end of racing Friday.

I assume one would only bother with extreme complexity if it was worth it.....

Fours
« Last Edit: 2020-Aug-29, 10:21 PM by fours »

Offline ratsack

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 327
  • Posts: 11103
« 2020-Aug-29, 11:08 PM Reply #57 »

And please guys. Specific answers only.

Not "I did this" and "I did that"

Some people can't get this PP7
see above comments , the king of spin   :clap2:


Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-30, 12:57 AM Reply #58 »
Some people can't get this PP7
see above comments , the king of spin   :clap2:

  :lol:

I was going to say something along the lines of thank you fours for demonstrating my point exactly but you just get to a point where there is no point  :no:

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 6873
« 2020-Aug-30, 08:06 AM Reply #59 »
PP7,

I got your point but you raised another one so addressed that.

Complexity for complexities sakes - is not just silly  - its stupid.

I don't want punters to get the idea that in order to win you must have :-

1) cheating in some way
2) rebates
3) inside knowledge from connections of some type be it trainers jockeys strappers vets etc
4) complex computing skills or resorting to SQL's R Python etc
5) advanced mathematics
6) huge pools only as per HK

Fours
ps I have done computer programming at Uni - only use it if needed. And its not - focussing on it may mean u have lost site of the desired end goal.
« Last Edit: 2020-Aug-30, 10:16 AM by fours »

Offline jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7303
« 2020-Aug-30, 08:37 AM Reply #60 »
Never said any such thing.

You need to be careful what you say jfc. Entropy's lawyers might interpret that as "defamation by implication" i.e. A falsely claims B was saying C was  liar.

In fact you did insinuate just that.

You didn't have the guts to say it directly.

So you latched on to pwa's inoffensive but incorrect post.



Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 6873
« 2020-Aug-30, 09:18 AM Reply #61 »
Totally agree.

See my comments (God knows where) that I am only backing 20-1 shots or better these days - each way.

I have had 4 bets this horse year for zero returns. I'll see where I'm at after 40 bets.

Point being is that it is a hobby and a bit of fun. No need to overstate what I am doing.

Gwenda's horse in Race 2 at Kembla. Liked the way she finished off her trial. Got a little bit of a bite this morning then back out.

FFS Risk of ruin stats cognizance is all you need for this hobby.

Fours

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-30, 03:24 PM Reply #62 »
In fact you did insinuate just that.

You didn't have the guts to say it directly.

So you latched on to pwa's inoffensive but incorrect post.

I did not insinuate anything so stop trying to get me to defame Entropy. I know your little games.

I was genuinely concerned for the guy after he over-reacted to my points about gamblers exaggerating the winnings and mistaking me talking about him when I was NOT talking about him specifically.

Pretty drastic reaction to tell moderators to delete his account. It would be the sort of reaction I would expect from someone who has fallen on hard times and we have social responsibilities on this forum to look after people - I feel that way at least. You probably couldn't care less.

I don't know Entropy and he does not know me so he may be living in Wolsley Rd Bellevue Hill for all I know but I have to take  position of compassion when someone reacts like that.

EDIT: I just reviewed my posts and at no time did I make any specific reference to Entropy. I cannot tell what he said because he's deleted his posts. Stop being a troublemaker jfc.
« Last Edit: 2020-Aug-30, 03:31 PM by PoisonPen7 »

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-30, 03:38 PM Reply #63 »
FFS Risk of ruin stats cognizance is all you need for this hobby.

Fours

FFS Stop claiming you have backed heaps of winners and made heaps of money on the Stock Market AFTER the event.

You started a thread up telling us what bets you were having but it just seemed to fade away. How did that go then?



And I noticed you edited this post removing your claim of something like 43%. Why did you remove the percentage figure?

PP7,

Is the complexity worth it?

My simple stuff is generating a a bigger % profit than most would believe on turnover this week from 53 bets to end of racing Friday.

I assume one would only bother with extreme complexity if it was worth it.....

Fours

« Last Edit: August 29, 2020, 10:21:03 PM by fours »



Offline pwa54

  • Listed
  • User 2549
  • Posts: 274
« 2020-Aug-30, 05:01 PM Reply #64 »
Not "incorrect" jfc. They made their money from card-counting at Blackjack until the 1990s.

This is from Richard Flanagan's profile on David Walsh in the New Yorker in 2013.

And so Walsh ended up in his first and, as it happened, his last year at the University of Tasmania, getting about in zip-up wool cardigans that his mother knitted for him, studying mathematics and computing. One day in the Physics Club, he overheard a conversation about card counting.
Six years earlier, Tasmania had opened Australia’s first legal casino, a five-minute walk from the University of Tasmania’s mathematics department. The students in the Physics Club had read a book on card counting, and started using what is known as “basic strategy”—principles based on mathematical calculations—to play blackjack at the casino. They were betting four dollars a hand and winning six dollars an hour.
“Why not scale up?” Walsh asked.
“Who’d take that sort of risk?” one of them replied.
Walsh taught himself basic strategy, walked down to the casino, and began winning. One afternoon at the university bar, playing a video game by himself, he was approached by a student he knew only vaguely.
“Apparently, you’re the bloke to get gambling calculations done,” Zeljko Ranogajec said.
For the other student card counters, Walsh said, gambling at the casino was “a social thing. For Zeljko, it was serious.” Walsh burned his money, but Ranogajec, a law and commerce student and the son of Croatian immigrants, hung onto his winnings, using them to bet ever bigger. Ranogajec understood the need for a mathematical edge if they were to win, while Walsh could appreciate the virtues of Ranogajec’s approach. And so they joined forces. By the end of the year, Walsh was at the casino every day from when it opened, at one o’clock in the afternoon, to four in the morning, when it closed. The dealers laughed at the students for thinking they could win, but Ranogajec’s pool was growing rapidly: from a two-hundred-dollar stake to fourteen thousand dollars in twelve months, and then to a hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year later.
In 1985, Ranogajec took Walsh with him to Las Vegas. They lost almost everything they had. Ranogajec spent the next five months at the tables painstakingly winning back their stake while Walsh escaped what he called “the scream of the bland” for a new discovery which was to prove their big break: the world’s largest collection of gambling literature, housed at the library at the University of Nevada. He read widely and deeply on gambling history and gambling systems, the psychology of gambling, its management, its workings as a business, why people win and lose.
When they returned to Australia, Walsh, who had never liked playing blackjack, began writing a computer program to bet on horse racing. Walsh, Ranogajec, and Ranogajec’s girlfriend took the overnight ferry to mainland Australia and drove on to Sydney, Ranogajec singing “If I Were a Rich Man” over and over. On Australia Day, 1987, the two young Tasmanians placed their first bet on a horse race using Walsh’s program. They won.
Ultimately, Thoroughbred racing became the main focus of their gambling, but for a time they struggled. Their ideas, systems, and programs were good, but not good enough. They were making only a little money and spending a lot, and on occasion they came close to losing it all. They kept going by playing blackjack. They were by now formidable players, and their ongoing wins led to them being banned from all the Australian casinos, so they took to playing in Korea, Sri Lanka, Macau, and South Africa to stay afloat. But the Bank Roll was becoming too well known. The group trained new faces in its card-counting system and sent them out to play. But the new card-counters were in turn quickly identified and banned.
Walsh and Ranogajec diversified. Using high mathematics and low cunning, they identified where small profits could be made by betting large sums. Risk remained. In 1993, Ranogajec won an eleven-million-dollar jackpot in a Sydney club, but he had bet fourteen million to win it. They went from racetrack to dog track to gaming table and back, playing everything in between, from chocolate wheels to baccarat; from Thoroughbred to greyhound racing.
There was also what Ranogajec calls “the low-lying fruit.” One time, they paid hundreds of people to fill out entry forms with every possible permutation of a lotto game, and won $1.6 million. Another time, Walsh discovered that a particular model of roulette wheel had an inbuilt and undetected bias that led to the number 27 being twenty per cent more likely to win, and win they did. Walsh bought himself a new Mercedes with the vanity plate RED-27.

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 6873
« 2020-Aug-30, 07:57 PM Reply #65 »
PP7,

You are just enbarrassing your self now.

The figure was 46% and only deleted because I did not want to bother with peoples disbelief.

Stock market thread speaks for itself - you totally embarasses yourself with false claims.

Last horse racing thread was on roughies in big fields to address Peter Mairs ongoing idiocy about same. It had the innovation of involving favourites as well combined with roughies in a manner never seen on this forum before or anywhere else for that matter.   Note that every bet type showed a profit. This is why the thread  ended as the point was made.

Quit while you are behind as you are only poisoning the thread. I'd rather not deal with your idiocy as well aas Mairs.

Fours

« Last Edit: 2020-Aug-30, 08:02 PM by fours »

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-30, 08:57 PM Reply #66 »
PP7,

You are just enbarrassing your self now.

The figure was 46% and only deleted because I did not want to bother with peoples disbelief.


Who is embarrassing who?

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 6873
« 2020-Aug-30, 09:13 PM Reply #67 »
Who is embarrassing who?

Given that that thread clearly stated why the thread was ending  at that time - rather than fading away as you claim....

Given that your false claims about the stock market have already been addressed some time ago .... and anyone can check the suggestions made on that thread at any time to see for themselves..... with rather significant news for one of them due in September... ...

it is unfortunately for you PP7 ultra clear.

Fours
ps suggest you lose the recent personal attacks side to you.... especially if you tend to falsity when doing so. This is the second time I have mentioned such to you.

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-30, 09:21 PM Reply #68 »
Given that that thread clearly stated why the thread was ending  at that time - rather than fading away as you claim....

Given that your false claims about the stock market have already been addressed some time ago .... and anyone can check the suggestions made on that thread at any time to see for themselves..... with rather significant news for one of them due in September... ...

it is unfortunately for you PP7 ultra clear.

Fours
ps suggest you lose the recent personal attacks side to you.... especially if you tend to falsity when doing so. This is the second time I have mentioned such to you.

What false claims about the Stock Market?

They are not false. You always tell everyone how smart you were after the event - same as the horses.

When challenged to a comp you came dead last.

If anyone else makes any comment you are on to them telling them they don't know what they are talking about.

Yet you continue to tip duds like RAP and tell me I don't know what I'm doing when I suggest PTX at 2.8 cents.

Your narcissism knows no bounds.

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 6873
« 2020-Aug-30, 09:34 PM Reply #69 »
PP7,

And still more false claims and more personal attacks.

I am entirely happy for anyone to read the stock market thread and form their own view.

Very few care though would be my bet however.

Your embarrassment goes on.

Fours

Offline jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7303
« 2020-Aug-31, 11:46 AM Reply #70 »
Not "incorrect" jfc. They made their money from card-counting at Blackjack until the 1990s.

This is from Richard Flanagan's profile on David Walsh in the New Yorker in 2013.

....

There was also what Ranogajec calls “the low-lying fruit.” One time, they paid hundreds of people to fill out entry forms with every possible permutation of a lotto game, and won $1.6 million. Another time, Walsh discovered that a particular model of roulette wheel had an inbuilt and undetected bias that led to the number 27 being twenty per cent more likely to win, and win they did. Walsh bought himself a new Mercedes with the vanity plate RED-27.

No one is disputing they made money from blackjack.

The issue in dispute is whether they had that big roulette win.

And from Flanagan's article they clearly did - it's there in rouge et noir.

PP7 sided with your initial "rather than roulette" post, thus effectively contradicting Entropy.

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Aug-31, 01:56 PM Reply #71 »
No one is disputing they made money from blackjack.

The issue in dispute is whether they had that big roulette win.

And from Flanagan's article they clearly did - it's there in rouge et noir.

PP7 sided with your initial "rather than roulette" post, thus effectively contradicting Entropy.

There was also what Ranogajec calls “the low-lying fruit.” One time, they paid hundreds of people to fill out entry forms with every possible permutation of a lotto game, and won $1.6 million. Another time, Walsh discovered that a particular model of roulette wheel had an inbuilt and undetected bias that led to the number 27 being twenty per cent more likely to win, and win they did. Walsh bought himself a new Mercedes with the vanity plate RED-27.

So to get some "low lying fruit" they conducted a chi-square test that came up with the result that 27 RED was 20% more likely to win than all other numbers.

#27 - 1 in 37 chance plus 20% times (1 in 37)
All other numbers - 1 in 37 chance minus 20% times (1 in 37)

That is one damn straight chi-square test that is.

If I saw such results I would assume that the croupier had one of those pedals you see in the old westerns and when they hit the pedal that number comes up.

If I were the floor manager and noticed that someone was winning enough to pay for a Mercedes on one table betting on a single number I would be shutting the table down.


And just to be pedantic you take Lotto combinations, not permutations unless you are playing Lotto Strike.


As pwa said, the "high flying fruit" would have been card counting in a badly run casino.

Offline jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7303
« 2020-Sep-01, 09:21 AM Reply #72 »
While the Flanagan article is consistent with my understanding of events, so many of the dates are wrong.

I wonder what that says about Walsh's mathematical and memory skills.

But this is one more quality that PP7 shares with Walsh.

He churns out some rubbish which I then correct. But soon after he spews out the same errors.

He demands answers from me that I find I have already provided.

And one thing of which he seems particularly forgetful is my repeated invitation to him to mend his ways.


Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 22442
« 2020-Sep-01, 11:14 AM Reply #73 »

But this is one more quality that PP7 shares with Walsh.

He churns out some rubbish which I then correct. But soon after he spews out the same errors.


Am I replying to fours or jfc? I cannot tell the difference any more.

Offline jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7303
« 2020-Sep-02, 05:51 PM Reply #74 »
I did not insinuate anything so stop trying to get me to defame Entropy. I know your little games.

I was genuinely concerned for the guy after he over-reacted to my points about gamblers exaggerating the winnings and mistaking me talking about him when I was NOT talking about him specifically.

Pretty drastic reaction to tell moderators to delete his account. It would be the sort of reaction I would expect from someone who has fallen on hard times and we have social responsibilities on this forum to look after people - I feel that way at least. You probably couldn't care less.

I don't know Entropy and he does not know me so he may be living in Wolsley Rd Bellevue Hill for all I know but I have to take  position of compassion when someone reacts like that.

EDIT: I just reviewed my posts and at no time did I make any specific reference to Entropy. I cannot tell what he said because he's deleted his posts. Stop being a troublemaker jfc.

Just browsed through all of Entropy's remaining posts.

Doesn't strike me as someone who can't handle his gambling.

And he certainly appears extremely well informed about pertinent matters.

As well as someone whose occasional posts I look forward to.

As I and others here already said.

And note in one of his earlier posts where he says "great forum, guys".

Long, long time ago.

But at least we still have PP7 here and he might teach us to become hobby punters.


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap