TURF GOSSIP.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1204, 29 March 1895, Page 20

TURF GOSSIP.

By Gipsy King. BETTING TO SYSTEM. In the January number of Baily's Magazine, a correspondent signing himself " EL." has been supplying some more figures in favour of his contention that it is possible to bet to a system and be able to have a credit balance at the end of the racing season. In his interesting article, "Science and the Turf," he says : "I commenced by giving the average of first favourites that won during the last four years, taking as the ground of my operations the first six races at the principal meetings throughout the season, and we found that in 1890 the average was 1-42, in 1891 L 37, in 1892 T3O, and in 1893 l - 35. Working on the same ground this season, my figures are 664 losses, 417 wins, or an average of 1*54, the worst race being the third, which gives 114 defeats to 63 wins; the most successful is the first, which comes out with 98 losses to 79 wins. Professor Pearson, a well-known authority, writing to the Fortnightly Review how eccentric the law of chance is, says: 'Monte Carlo roulette, if judged by returns, is, if the laws of chance rule, from the standpoint of exact science, the most prodigious miracle of the nineteenth century/" "H." goes on to say:—"Thus, from the figures I have just given, we might fix the average of favourites that win at one in two, and, from past records, that of the leading jockey at one in four. . . . First let us take these favourites. As already stated, during the past season 644 have lost, 417 won. A level stake of .£lO (divided when two or more horses start equal favourites) would have shown .£6440 lost, .£6070 won, or a total loss of .£370. As, however, the average during an entire season against the favourite is under 6 to 4, to follow it on any plan with a level stake throughout would give little prospect of a fair win. I will, therefore, aftw

a loss, double my stake, but this shall be my only increase, my object being" to practise economy in every possible way. So with this stake of -£lO, and .£2O, I find, on applying my plan to these favourites, I come out with a win of «£2BO. If we take five seasons, the result is still more satisfactory. Accordingly, I find in 1893 I would have won .£350; in 1892, .£1140; in 1891, £680; in 1890, .£250." " H." concludes his article by saying : " These results serve also as an object lesson, for they go to corroborate the oftrepeated remark that in the Ions? run the ordinary or haphazard backer loses his money. The same fate awaits the follower of every so-called system according to pessimistic wiseacres. Of them I would ask the following. How does the bookmaker amass his gains ? Is it by blindly laying to every client to unlimited amounts? On the contrary, he 'bets to figures/ which is merely another way of saying that he has a system of regulating his outlays. Why, therefore, should not the backer adopt the same with a fair prospect of success ?" Within a limited space I have endeavoured to give the chief points urged by "H.," which proves that the happy-go-lucky sort of backer must lose money in the long run; at any rate, has more chance, according to figures, of losing than the backer that sticks to a " system" in making investments on the turf. In recording my "tips" in the New Zealand Times I have as far as possible stuck to public form, occasionally using a little discrimination when it has occurred to me that certain horses have not been exhibiting their true form. A sporting writer can hardly advocate the "first favourite " system, as he is not in a position to know, when recording his " anticipations/' what horse will be favourite in a particular race, so that he is obliged to follow the public form system as near as possible. Prom the list of my "Anticipations" from September to February of the present racing season, which I have compiled from the files of the New Zealand Times, I find that during the six months I have had to record my "tips" for 301 races. In doing so I have mentioned the names of 362 horses, with the following results : —Seventeen were nonstarters, 110 were winners, 45 ran second, and 44 ran thi»d. The total amount returnable in dividends for the 110 winners was 45381 17s, from which is to be deducted £345, the amount invested, less the It nonstarters, which leaves a net profit of .£36 17s for the six months ending February, or an;average profit of £6 per month. It frequently occurs that an owner has two horses in the same race, and at a distance I am unable to ascertain which of the two horses is likely to be entrusted with the "confidence" (ahem) of the stable; thus I practically call upon my supporters —if I have any—to back two horses, when I know that in the majority of instances only one of the horses will be backed by the owner. However, even with such disadvantages, 1 may claim to have shown a satisfactory balance to the followers of "public form." But the system must be rigidly adhered to. Taks, fcr instance, four days' races in the spring—l mentioned 42 horses, 2 were non-starters, 16 were winners, 3 ran second and 3 ran third; net dividends returnable, 4522 17s. But the next day's racing I "tipped" for I did not select a winner, which proves that the system must be followed up. Race meetings extending over two and three days appear to be the most disastrous to backers, but of course they must follow their tipster each time he records his anticipations! Some people have a plan for following a certain family of racehorses, the Musket family being the popular selection. I have not gone exhaustively into this plan, but taking the Wellington Cup Meeting, the Egmont Racing Club's Summer Meeting, and the Manawatu Racing Club's Autumn Meeting, which followed each other, followers of the Musket family would have lost 4527 12s. Another popular system of betting is to place 451 on the favourite in the first race, and if that loses, to place 452 on the favourite in the second race, and if that loses, start again with the investment of 451, but if the favourite in the first race should win, the plan is to start again with 451, and if that is lost to go to 452 in the next race, sticking to the favourites right through the meeting. Of course picking out three meetings is hardly a fair test of any system, but investing on the favourite in each race as described above, and at the race meetings mentioned, backers of the favourite would have lost 4314 2s, whereas following my "tips," i.e., "public form," for the same meetings would only have resulted in a loss of nine shillings. PURIFICATION OF TROTTING. , It is a -popular " wheeze" to have a fling at the swindles perpetrated on the trotting track, when anything of a shady character in connection with the *Murkan national horse sport is brought to light. It will be gener* ally accepted that trotting is not nearly bo popular a sport as racing, because one of the J>rincipal methods adopted to make a horse ose a trotting race is so difficult to detect that those who are inclined to support trotting despair of ever being able to surmount the difficulty, and that is, of being able to tell, with any degree of accuracy, when a horse *! breaks " of his own accord, or when he is forced to "break" for the purpose of assisting him to lose a race. I'm afraid this will always remain an enigma, unless those who undertake the management of trotting meetings place reliable officers at different positions round the track. In my opinion one of the chief troubles of the trotting clubs is what is termed "inconsistency," which in plainer language means " pulling w a horse in one race, and allowing him to win the next one he starts for. But now that the officers of trotting clubs are becoming more vigilant, those who practise this little game have to be extremely careful, a* it is frequently attended with risk. The

favourite dodge is (as with racing) to start a horse at. a trotting meeting one day and " lose," then take tb.3 horse to a different trotting meeting, say next day, and win. There is no " inconsistency " about that, the owner or trainer claims, because the horse is trotting on a different track, or has " come on Xl since the previous day, etc. Trotting clubs are at present powerless to deal with such " inconsistency " as mentioned, but this little game is just about played out, judging by a resolution which the Canterbury Metropolitan Trotting Association has under consideration. At a recent meeting of the committee of this much-alive institution, Mr C. Hood-Williams, the chairman of the Association, drew attention to the necessity of framing a rule in regard to the disqualification of horses for inconsistent running at a previous meeting of another club, and it was decided to publish a proposed rule on the subject, which is to be considered at a future meeting of the Association. Those who take an interest in trotting will welcome the adoption of such a rule, and the numerous tiotting clubs will then have power to deal with this too prevalent practice. The trotting associations have adopted many useful rules (which they have put some meaning into) from the Rules of Racing, but the Kacing Conference will have to adopt the proposed rule from the Rules of Trotting, as there is just as much " inconsistency rt noticeable on racecourses ; in fact it is the only "dodge" that can be successfully worked on the turf without fear of disqualification. •