i didnt look at it where it wasnt in, for me id rather more in with more to remove to make sure everybody looks at horses with a chance. id have 90% removed it tho Posted by MICKYBLUE
Ok, I agree.
But if I do that, people have to remove the required number though, otherwise pointless if people just remove a few outsiders.
In Response to Re: REMOVERS SPREADSHEET FOR CHESTER TODAY (FRI 12TH MAY 2017) : Out of interest Snuffer, do you think if I had put "Sound Advice" in, would you have removed it? Or is too hard to say now, after the event? Posted by StayOrGo
Tbh Graham when reading up on the other horses in that race it was never really mentioned in good light so it could have been, but it was tough to remove 12 today so may have stayed in.
Maybe We should pay more attention to the ones not selected but then if we all mentioned ones you didn't select it would sew seeds and the perms would be out of control and you would remove winners in their place, it's a fine line but good fun none the less!
Maybe today was a stretch too far after yesterday's good result, you must have been shattered after your 'all nighter' but I guess it's the buzz of racing that keeps us all wanting more!
In Response to Re: REMOVERS SPREADSHEET FOR CHESTER TODAY (FRI 12TH MAY 2017) : Tbh Graham when reading up on the other horses in that race it was never really mentioned in good light so it could have been, but it was tough to remove 12 today so may have stayed in. Maybe We should pay more attention to the ones not selected but then if we all mentioned ones you didn't select it would sew seeds and the perms would be out of control and you would remove winners in their place, it's a fine line but good fun none the less! Maybe today was a stretch too far after yesterday's good result, you must have been shattered after your 'all nighter' but I guess it's the buzz of racing that keeps us all wanting more! Posted by Snuffer
Hi R.
I did make the following statement on the OP today:
"I have narrowed it down quite a bit, maybe too much, so if you want me to put any back in, please let me know ASAP."
I will leave more in next time and ask people to remove more as a result.
However, that strategy is only going to work if we have plenty of people doing a full set of removals. (Not a good turn out yesterday or today) Thank god for SNUFFER and he's not even in the syndicate, but is doing a sterling job for us with the removals.
Maybe next GO-LIVE we'll get more "remover" input with that regard.
I never look at this thread coz I'm not in the syndicate and I would hate for it to go down on something I'd suggested you take out. I think it's easier to concentrate on the horses you definitely want in any perm.
Today at Chester looked difficult, but as we saw, many of the bankers did actually win, so it might be better to concentrate on your main strategy and pick 1 banker, so that you can have multiple choices in the difficult races.
It's amazing to see that the Sporting Life Pick7 went down on the last leg the last 2 days, meaning the people had picked the winners of the first 6 races with just 1 choice in each race.
I never look at this thread coz I'm not in the syndicate and I would hate for it to go down on something I'd suggested you take out. I think it's easier to concentrate on the horses you definitely want in any perm. Today at Chester looked difficult, but as we saw, many of the bankers did actually win, so it might be better to concentrate on your main strategy and pick 1 banker, so that you can have multiple choices in the difficult races. It's amazing to see that the Sporting Life Pick7 went down on the last leg the last 2 days, meaning the people had picked the winners of the first 6 races with just 1 choice in each race. Posted by MISTY4ME
Thanks for this Mist.
I think by optimising and combining both the NAP's selections and the removal choices, we can get the best results.
Often horses at fairly big prices 10/1, 12/1 type things are not picked as NAP's but if they are not removed and come in it's a potential perm buster for others, whilst we may still be in.
Regarding the pick 7, yes they have done well from a single line, but I reckon as it's free, there will be literally 10's of thousands of people doing it.
misty and phantom please put your removals in on next attempt if available. nobody will hold any to ransom, at the end of day its a gamble, obviously gambles lose nobody's fault just the way it is.
misty and phantom please put your removals in on next attempt if available. nobody will hold any to ransom, at the end of day its a gamble, obviously gambles lose nobody's fault just the way it is. not many putting input now so need help. Posted by MICKYBLUE
Yes, please do and others too.
Although please remember, it's all or none regarding the number of removals requested.
Comments
But if I do that, people have to remove the required number though, otherwise pointless if people just remove a few outsiders.
:=)
Cheers,
G
I think by optimising and combining both the NAP's selections and the removal choices, we can get the best results.
Often horses at fairly big prices 10/1, 12/1 type things are not picked as NAP's but if they are not removed and come in it's a potential perm buster for others, whilst we may still be in.
Regarding the pick 7, yes they have done well from a single line, but I reckon as it's free, there will be literally 10's of thousands of people doing it.
Cheers,
G