Trading What I see !?

[Emmson]

Do any of the prolific dog traders running automation factor in that the dogs is a very corrupt sport? (the most corrupt sport in UK imo) Or do you have asses that corruption will help or harm to the same amount over a very large sample size.

I've always wondered what those dogs that show excessive drifts from fave that keep on drifting all the way to the off and what sticking a £1 on them when they are at their highest price 5 seconds before post time would show over a large sample size.

[ShaunWhite]

I don't have the info to guess what might be a genuine or a dodgy move. And although I can't prove it I suspect the outliers are a wash. That assumption comes from the fact I have approx 50% backs and 50% lays and don't find one way or the other significantly different.

But if I was having a dozen bets a day I don't think I'd touch it with a barge poll for the reasons you say.

[ShaunWhite]

(the most corrupt sport in UK imo)

It's corrupt but with a small c, without it there wouldn't be dog racing. You can't make a living as a trainer or owner on £75 prize money so they, let's say, supplement their income. Big Asian syndicate corruption is one thing but imo if its just nod and a wink stuff to pay a few wages then good luck to them.

[wearthefoxhat]

They seem to be trying to make the effort to improve the image of greyhound racing.

Danny Brock the jockey who's been suspended for 15 years for fixing horse races, set up as a greyhound trainer, until they recently suspended the licence.

brock.png

[ShaunWhite]

They seem to be trying to make the effort to improve the image of greyhound racing.

If the GBGB cared about dog welfare as much as they do about their "image" then that would be an improvement.


.....the information comes from the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB), which is the self-regulating body which governs registered greyhound tracks in the UK.

Its figures show 1,003 fatalities a year. 257 dogs are euthanised at track side on “humane grounds”, 348 because treatment was deemed too expensive, there was poor prognosis or no home was found, 67 were killed due to being “unsuitable for homing” and 55 died from “sudden death”.

...and that's just the "official" numbers, heaven knows what the real numbers are in breeding and training.

[Michael5482]

They seem to be trying to make the effort to improve the image of greyhound racing.

If the GBGB cared about dog welfare as much as they do about their "image" then that would be an improvement.


.....the information comes from the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB), which is the self-regulating body which governs registered greyhound tracks in the UK.

Its figures show 1,003 fatalities a year. 257 dogs are euthanised at track side on “humane grounds”, 348 because treatment was deemed too expensive, there was poor prognosis or no home was found, 67 were killed due to being “unsuitable for homing” and 55 died from “sudden death”.

...and that's just the "official" numbers, heaven knows what the real numbers are in breeding and training.

And there possibly lies the core issue "self regulating body". About time there was some type of independent body that encompasses all sports.

[foxwood]

If the GBGB cared about dog welfare as much as they do about their "image" then that would be an improvement.


.....the information comes from the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB), which is the self-regulating body which governs registered greyhound tracks in the UK.

Its figures show 1,003 fatalities a year. 257 dogs are euthanised at track side on “humane grounds”, 348 because treatment was deemed too expensive, there was poor prognosis or no home was found, 67 were killed due to being “unsuitable for homing” and 55 died from “sudden death”.

...and that's just the "official" numbers, heaven knows what the real numbers are in breeding and training.

Bit selective there - that quote is from 2018 - the latest figure from 2021 by GBGB shows that reduced by nearly two thirds to 359 fatalities out of nearly 16k dogs running at uk tracks in that year (2.25%).

For a truer understanding you need to compare the numbers against those for the general dog population to know if the overall statistics are better or worse than most people treat their dogs. You'd then have a truer picture of whether greyhounds are treated worse than most dogs or not.

Personally, I don't know the answers but I think those questions need answering to understand the problem (if there is one) in order to avoid suggestions of emotional bias.

PS this paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-88342-0 from 2016 suggests a mortality rate of 3.30% in the general dog population where a dog has been registered with a vet. I would suggest that the majority of dogs are registered since they need injections at the puppy stage to avoid various diseases.

[ShaunWhite]

Bit selective there - that quote is from 2018 .

My error, not specifically selected but not checked for being typical either.

I get the point but using the general ownership numbers is a flawed comparison, racing dogs are retired at 4 or 5 when 'all' dogs include those up to 13 or 14. If young professional althetes died at the same rate as the general population then there'd be questions.

[foxwood]

I get the point but using the general ownership numbers is a flawed comparison, racing dogs are retired at 4 or 5 when 'all' dogs include those up to 13 or 14. If young professional althetes died at the same rate as the general population then there'd be questions.

touche

[wearthefoxhat]

Sorted!?

Hope the GBGB are reading this thread.

stats.png

solution.png

[ShaunWhite]

I get the point but .

touche

There's nothing more vague than facts sometimes. But whatever they are I'm sure we both agree there's some great owners of horses and dogs, and a handful of c**ts putting the whole industry at risk.

[foxwood]

There's nothing more vague than facts sometimes. But whatever they are I'm sure we both agree there's some great owners of horses and dogs, and a handful of c**ts putting the whole industry at risk.

Yup

[robsmith]

Hi Kai, which are the good courses? Pm me if you prefer. Thanks, Rob

I know it's an unpopular opinion but if you really feel you're getting nowhere you might as well pay for a concrete trading course instead, would cost less and at least you'd know which trading concepts still work etc, worst case you have a solid reference point to build on. Obviously big shortcuts exist and not everyone is selling crap, there are low-key traders that offer stupid value for whatever reason.

Because ultimately it doesn't matter whether you pay £300 to the market or to someone directly, at the end of the day your money goes to real traders just the same.

[Kai]

I know it's an unpopular opinion but if you really feel you're getting nowhere you might as well pay for a concrete trading course instead, would cost less and at least you'd know which trading concepts still work etc, worst case you have a solid reference point to build on. Obviously big shortcuts exist and not everyone is selling crap, there are low-key traders that offer stupid value for whatever reason.

Because ultimately it doesn't matter whether you pay £300 to the market or to someone directly, at the end of the day your money goes to real traders just the same.

Hi Kai, which are the good courses? Pm me if you prefer. Thanks, Rob

Strictly IMHO for prerace I was impressed with how succinct Tomas has made his course (Sports Trading Exposed I think is called), for inplay that Carl Trader bloke looks quite capable on the ladder, those come to mind first. Generally look for ladder video examples, an endless Chinese wall of marketing and testimonials on a page means nothing.

But don't go for it just because you've randomly heard a compelling argument somewhere, I could probably sell water to a drowning man

If it looks value then go for it, not a bad idea to ask around because when starting out it's near impossible to tell who even trades, but with more experience it gets very obvious very quickly, hence the ladder videos remark, they can't hide on the ladder!

[robsmith]

Thanks Kai, much appreciated.

I know it's an unpopular opinion but if you really feel you're getting nowhere you might as well pay for a concrete trading course instead, would cost less and at least you'd know which trading concepts still work etc, worst case you have a solid reference point to build on. Obviously big shortcuts exist and not everyone is selling crap, there are low-key traders that offer stupid value for whatever reason.

Because ultimately it doesn't matter whether you pay £300 to the market or to someone directly, at the end of the day your money goes to real traders just the same.

Hi Kai, which are the good courses? Pm me if you prefer. Thanks, Rob

Strictly IMHO for prerace I was impressed with how succinct Tomas has made his course (Sports Trading Exposed I think is called), for inplay that Carl Trader bloke looks quite capable on the ladder, those come to mind first. Generally look for ladder video examples, an endless Chinese wall of marketing and testimonials on a page means nothing.

But don't go for it just because you've randomly heard a compelling argument somewhere, I could probably sell water to a drowning man

If it looks value then go for it, not a bad idea to ask around because when starting out it's near impossible to tell who even trades, but with more experience it gets very obvious very quickly, hence the ladder videos remark, they can't hide on the ladder!