Sent £50 by bank transfer today, ready for 1st attempt.
I would have had a go today if the Jackpot syndicate was still running, but maybe not for the Blue Moon club yet. However, 31K in the prize pool today, so maybe worth looking at if rollover today?
Received. You will have 5 * £10 shares for our first attempt, whenever that may be.
Hi Graham I have sent £10(1 share) into your account a few minutes ago. This is towards the first Jackpot attempt.
Received, thx Wynne. It's no problem if people are worried about missing it and want to pay upfront, but it might be a long wait, that's the only thing. So it might be better for people to wait until it actually happens.
There's been a couple of roll overs, so if it rolls over again tomorrow (19/07/18), it may be worth keeping an eye on things the following few days. As always, thoughts on whether we should go for it are always welcome.
G, AS I WAS WRITING THE BIT BELOW I BECAME LESS CONFIDENT OF WHETHER IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, SO PLEASE DONT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME THINKING ABOUT IT OR EXPLAINING IF YOU THINK IT BAD IDEA.
V
You have probably thought this through in the dark deepest past but as we are now going for it once in a blue moon and as such the removers would only be done a few times a year would it be worth looking at getting rid of removers. At times I thought the removers gave us too wide a range on horses to include in some races. I might be wrong on this of course , I usually am . Surely if our normal crew were asked to pick the WINNER of each of the six races, it will give you the same info but you would also be able to include late movers/more horses of your choice. For instance if all of us reckoned the winner of say two or three of the races was the same we could narrow the selections in those races and be wider in some others. It would also focus our minds a lot more, I am sure doing the removers is such a task sometimes we mess up, i certainly have a lot this year looking for a number of horses i can remove instead of concentrating more on the one i think can win and getting that right. The Go Live naps could then be on all six selections or on three that were listed in BOLD if you want to keep to 3. Of course there could be variants on this ie picking two horses for each race or people being able to highlight ONE danger horse to their selection if they are uncertain in a race. As I said ignore me if you think bad idea but might be an easier way to give you info you want.
No problem. Always happy to receive constructive input.
I think the key thing for us is the perm structures. This is the bit I feel we got right. However I am happy to be open minded about how the actual horse selections are made.
I take on board yours, Misty's and Wynne's feedback regarding the removers and I am happy to try something new.
I like your idea of people napping a horse in every race, particularly when we are not going for it very often.
It also means Roger won't need to do the remover's spreadsheet potentially at very short notice.
I have designed a NAP sheet to cater for this, take a look (you won't be able to update this yet)
I would suggest that everyone puts in one NAP for each race, and optionally puts in a "Next Best" for any race they wish to. Although NB's won't be compulsory for each race.
Next Best will be taken into consideration for the perms, but won't count for the NAP's competition.
Although, V, if you want to record a table for NB's results, you are more than welcome to.
Snuffer, I might need to enlist you again for counting up the number of NAP's and NB's.
P.S. At the moment totalling each person's profit and loss will be a manual thing, so would be good if everyone confirms/checks the total P/L of their NAPS on the day.
Comments
I have sent £10(1 share) into your account a few minutes ago.
This is towards the first Jackpot attempt.
Either is OK.
Cheers,
G
Cheers,
Graham
I have sent £10 for first attempt, Cheers.
If it rolls over again tomorrow, we'll start taking a look.
Roger, if it rolls over again, will you be able to find out the card for Tuesday?
Many thanks,
G
OK, NO PROBLEM.
1 unit on 8: JUSTICE PLEASING
.5 on 1: ABUSHAMAH
.5 on 4: REBEL STATE
Well it's a roll over.
I will await Roger, and then take a look at the meeting. Please feel free to input.
Cheers,
G
Not an easy card
Whilst it meets most of the objective criteria to go for it, I think we should give it a miss, due to the sheer size of the fields.
Plus the "would be" banker is in LEG 5. Historically not a good leg for us. :=)
It's a NO-GO.
AS I WAS WRITING THE BIT BELOW I BECAME LESS CONFIDENT OF WHETHER IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, SO PLEASE DONT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME THINKING ABOUT IT OR EXPLAINING IF YOU THINK IT BAD IDEA.
V
You have probably thought this through in the dark deepest past but as we are now going for it once in a blue moon and as such the removers would only be done a few times a year would it be worth looking at getting rid of removers. At times I thought the removers gave us too wide a range on horses to include in some races.
I might be wrong on this of course , I usually am .
Surely if our normal crew were asked to pick the WINNER of each of the six races, it will give you the same info but you would also be able to include late movers/more horses of your choice. For instance if all of us reckoned the winner of say two or three of the races was the same we could narrow the selections in those races and be wider in some others. It would also focus our minds a lot more, I am sure doing the removers is such a task sometimes we mess up, i certainly have a lot this year looking for a number of horses i can remove instead of concentrating more on the one i think can win and getting that right.
The Go Live naps could then be on all six selections or on three that were listed in BOLD if you want to keep to 3.
Of course there could be variants on this ie picking two horses for each race or people being able to highlight ONE danger horse to their selection if they are uncertain in a race. As I said ignore me if you think bad idea but might be an easier way to give you info you want.
I like the idea of picking 2 from each race.
Thoughts Graham!
I think the key thing for us is the perm structures. This is the bit I feel we got right. However I am happy to be open minded about how the actual horse selections are made.
I take on board yours, Misty's and Wynne's feedback regarding the removers and I am happy to try something new.
I like your idea of people napping a horse in every race, particularly when we are not going for it very often.
It also means Roger won't need to do the remover's spreadsheet potentially at very short notice.
I have designed a NAP sheet to cater for this, take a look (you won't be able to update this yet)
I would suggest that everyone puts in one NAP for each race, and optionally puts in a "Next Best" for any race they wish to. Although NB's won't be compulsory for each race.
Next Best will be taken into consideration for the perms, but won't count for the NAP's competition.
Although, V, if you want to record a table for NB's results, you are more than welcome to.
Snuffer, I might need to enlist you again for counting up the number of NAP's and NB's.
What do people think?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSZpB-SYJqFeLhbpDZtZMXj86k55sSk7q3uXRLhBTdARGTqyXDsGp4s6zJdtdK4rjRkh76EjSJHhtlI/pubhtml
Cheers,
G
P.S. At the moment totalling each person's profit and loss will be a manual thing, so would be good if everyone confirms/checks the total P/L of their NAPS on the day.