I just wanted to put a post here about a new lay product available, called Laying Seven.

You may very well have seen an email about it. I bought a copy with the intention of trialling it on the blog over the next week or so, but I am afraid it will not even make the cut.

The ’system’ comprises of six steps. Luckily for us, all of the variables can be researched with my software, so I interrogated it to find out past performance.

Between 1991 and 1997, the horses in question actually made decent profits, meaning that a layer would have lost even before the inflated odds you need to lay on betfair.

Since 1998, you’d have a strike rate of 82.25% (not bad at all), but - after betfair odds on average 16% higher, and paying 5% commission on correct lays, you’d have lost £150!

So, not big losses but certainly not a system I’m going to bother with.

Incidentally, if you used a rolling 5% of your bank per lay, and started with 20 points, you’d have been out of cash pretty quickly.

What narked me still further about this system was the post script:

“Improving Strike Rate

The Second Favourite Laying System should generate
between 80 and 90 % Strike Rate or, stated another way,
80 to 90 of every 100 of your Lay Bets should have a
successful outcome, ie. the horse will lose the event.
If this is not the case, you will have to tighten your
selection criteria along the following lines:

1. Introduce further selection limitations on the “Last Run”
criteria. This may be in terms of an increase to 14 or even
21 days as the time period in which the horse has not had
an outing.

2. Tighten up the “Previous Results” specification to ensure
that the horse has not attained first or second place in three
or more previous outings. Alternatively, specify that it
must not have been placed in the specified number of past
races, ie. 1st, 2nd or 3rd, so a 1, 2 or 3 should not appear in
the Form list for the most recent outings.

The alteration of these criteria should ensure an increase in
Strike Rate but remember that by tightening the criteria
your number of potential selections will reduce
accordingly. Some Laying Systems produce very few
selections, in some cases only a handful every week, but
their Strike Rate is very good, which is the most important
aspect of any Laying System.”

Now I don’t know about you, but for me a system should not require tweaking. It either works or it doesn’t work. Saying, “If this is not the case you will need to tighten your selection criteria” is preposterous. What will the author be doing? Is he suggesting that the system doesn’t work himself with this statement?

I have to concede to a belief that the writer of this product, and a number of other (very) similar products, is a fly by night. It’s hard to get hold of him, and he uses some fairly sharp practices as well.

There are a number of ‘experts’ quoted on the sales letter, and at least one of them I am surprised to see associated with this.

My advice is don’t buy this - there are much better products available, such as the Racing Secrets [Exposed] system which was reviewed on these pages.

If you’ve already bought a copy of Laying Seven, you do of course retain the option to request a refund, if you so wish.

I won’t be reviewing this product and I will be requesting a refund. Not for me or for the pages of Nag3.

Matt

This entry was posted on Tuesday, June 26th, 2007 at 5:01 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.