New Cert Method

Another Flat season is here again with its traditional big handicap to get us under way - the Lincolnshire. You realise that you are no longer a novice at this racing game when you can recall the Lincoln taking place in its original venue, and not in Doncaster as now. Question. What was special about the Lincoln of 1948? Lots of things maybe, if you were the winning owner, trainer or jockey or if you had backed the winner at 33/1. But historically, it was something else. The number of runners who lined up for the flag start that day was a staggering 58, almost double the maximum allowed today, and I understand it created a world record. The winner, incidentally, was Commissar, trained by Arthur Budgett and ridden by Bill Rickaby. He had been bought as a foal for only 270 guineas, and although he was an 8-year old, the Lincoln was his very first attempt at a mile.

However, enough of looking back; let's look ahead to the new Flat season with two simple ideas that I think should be profitable. First, the one I mentioned in November, based on the Signposts feature, the most popular Nap of the day. I'm sure it will be worth following, especially with these two additional suggestions. Sometimes there is no single most popular Nap, with perhaps 2, 3 or even 4 or more sharing the honour. When that happens I'd advise splitting your stake if there are 2, but should there be more than 2 I'd suggest no bet that day. Obviously, a singular most popular Nap must carry more confidence than when there are two or more. My second suggestion is simply to use a modest staking plan since the winning strike rate is so high.

We've given a number of suitable staking plans with our systems over the past months, so choose whatever one best suits your individual approach. My second idea is also remarkably simple and profitable, and with fewer selections than the previous one. I have the complete figures for Flat season 2002, but not for last year. If anyone wishes to research it for 2003 you might come up with some interesting results. I'd hope it would be just as profitable as the previous year. In 2002 there were 129 selections and 40 winners, a strike rate of 31%. It produced a profit of over 40 points. And what is this simple idea? Back all beaten favourites on their last run that were odds-on for that run. That's it, and you'd be surprised at some of the big prices you get when you back them. As I write this I'm looking at Saturday 6th September 2003, where The Persuader, odds-on from his previous run, won nicely at 11/2. After the serious business of racing, let's turn to the more trivial matter of politics! I saw something on T.V. the other day that reminded me of the best political joke I've ever known - a real classic - so I thought I might re-tell it. What I saw on T.V. was Charles Kennedy, the Lib-Dem leader, being interviewed by Jeremy Paxman or some such interrogator. One question was, "Could you imagine being married to someone who didn't share your political views?" Kennedy was rather taken aback and said that he'd never considered such a possibility, but on reflection thought that he probably couldn't. And that's what reminded me of the joke.

A female Labour M.P. and a male Tory M.P. decided that they would get married despite their obvious political differences. Everything went well until they arrived at the honeymoon hotel. They were having a drink in the bar before adjourning to bed to consummate the political alliance, when someone made a political comment that sparked a fierce ideological argument, resulting in our honeymoon couple going to bed at each other's throats, rather than some other part of their anatomies! They lay in the honeymoon double bed poles and policies apart. But human nature being what it is (even for MPs), the new wife in the middle of the night spoke wistfully from the back of the bed saying, "There is a split in the Labour party, and if the Conservative member would like to stand, I'm sure he would get in." From the front of the bed came her new husband's sad reply, "The Conservative member has already stood, independently, three times and on each occasion has lost his deposit." If you're like me there are times in your betting life when you fancy following a system that gives longer-priced, more speculative selections; but at other stages you go for the shorter-priced near certainties. That's what we have here. I can remember following this system when it was called Cert A Day, but then new rules were added making it even more selective and more profitable, and with a new name - New Cert Method. Everything is fully and clearly explained with results. Just one other thing needs to be said. It lists the four Racing Post tipsters to be used - Diomed, Topspeed, Postmark and Spotlight. Of course Diomed is no longer one of them, so we have the choice of using the other three only, or adding Postdata as the fourth. My preference would be to use the four, as this preserves the essence of the system.

New Cert Method

Before outlining the new rules for the Cert Method, I'll give the basic rules first as you'll need to apply these before you can narrow the selections down.

Basic Rules.

1. The paper required to operate this system is the Racing Post.

2. The meeting to concentrate on is the day's principal meeting. This is usually covered on the centre pages of the Racing Post.

3. The races to consider are all non-handicap races. All non-handicap races, sellers, claimers etc, as long as it is a non-handicap race you consider it.

4. Taking each non-handicap race in turn, you see what is being selected by the following four tipsters - Diomed, Topspeed, Postmark and Spotlight. If three of these four advisers select the same horse in a particular nonhandicap race and it is forecast favourite in the Racing Post betting forecast, it goes onto the short list. At this stage delete from your short list any horse that is forecast lower than 2/5, i.e., if quoted at 2/5 or better it stays on the short list. If quoted at 4/11, 1/3 etc it is deleted from the short list.

5. Once you have been through all the non-handicap races at the principal meeting and short-listed those horses indicated by the rules above, you will then obtain the day's selection by backing the horse at the lowest forecast starting price. If two horses are forecast at the same starting price, then back both.

6. Nine days out of ten you will obtain a selection from the principal meeting. Occasionally you will not. In these instances apply the above set of rules to the first meeting covered in the Racing Post and if still no bet, the second meeting and so on until you arrive at a selection. Very occasionally you will have a no betting day. Note. You only count the horse as being selected by Postmark if it is clear top rated. Those are the basic rules of the Cert Method. By using this method over the last four months you would have obtained the following selections. Although some may consider four months as not long enough to be conclusive, I would point out that we have covered this method over the last year or so, and a 50% strike rate is a fair indication of how the system will perform overall. There were 52 winners from 100 bets, with a L.S.P. of 9.12 points. Return on outlay 9%.

To make the method even more selective and profitable, you can apply the following. First of all, apply the basic Cert rules to find the day's selection. Wait for a loser, and then start backing the Cert selections. For instance, if on day one the selection loses, you back the Cert selection on day two. If the selection loses on day two, you back the selection on day three and so on until you have a winner. Once you have a winner you wait until the Cert Method gives another loser before you start backing again. By operating in this manner you would have narrowed down the basic selections of the method to - 47 bets with 29 winners, an L.S.P. of 15.52 points and return on investment of 33%.

The second way of making the Cert Method even more selective is just an extension of the above rule. Work the basic Cert Method as usual, but wait until the method has given two consecutive losers before starting to back the Cert selections. Once you have backed a winner, stop betting until the method again gives two consecutive losers. This would have given the following results. 18 bets giving 13 winners, with a L.S.P. of 10.23 points and return on investment of 60%.

Taking the idea one stage further and only backing Cert selections after three consecutive losers would have given four bets and four winners and an investment return of 79%. This is probably taking the idea too far as few punters would be prepared to wait four months for only four bets at these prices.