BM is twenty pages long and of those twenty pages, the last five contain the ‘meat’. There are, as I say, two laying systems, one for flat and one for jumps.

Helpfully, they’ve both been created using Racing Systems Builder, some tremendous software much loved by me, which means I’m able to check the results for Betting Maximizer.

So, what did I learn? Well, first off, the flat system seems OK. You’d have won 4,671 of your 5,243 bets over the last five years (a strike rate of 89.09%), and made an average of 27.54 points a year, or 137 points over five years.

That’s an unspectacular, yet still profitable, ROI of 2.6%.

The National Hunt laying system fared less well, and actually produced a loss by my calculations (using average Betfair SP’s per industry SP bracket) of five points over five years. In other words, it broke even, less a point a year.

These include, of course, 5% commission on winning lays.

For such a small ROI, I couldn’t recommend this system as being one for the portfolio. But, on the basis that it does provide plenty of action and, over the long term, shouldn’t lose you money, it will make a fun system for those with time on their hands and a yearning to play the ponies.

Far from the worst I’ve seen, but not a serious proposition.

You can read the about Betting Maximizer here… (beware the ‘wait, don’t go’ boxes!)

Since that article, we’ve had a number of emails from punters who’ve been suckered by these guys in the past and there’s one name in particular that has cropped up on more than one occasion. Almost all the emails have told the same stories, stories of glossy brochures, promises of high prices, great runs, and greater profits. The reality has been a lot more sobering! Below is a typical account of a recent experience:

“After receiving numerous letters with grand claims – things like “might gamble….sure to win….laid out especially for this race”, I decided to get in touch with one particular ‘odds to’ servic and it was quite possibly the sorriest day of my life.  The letter I replied to claimed the odds would be very good, not double figures, but certainly the top end of single figures.  I called and left my details and was called back to confirm I still wanted the information.  I stated there and then that I didn’t want the information if it was a short priced favourite, I would only take the info if it was a good price.  I was assured that prices in the region of 7/2 would be available but I should ‘get on’ early as the price was expected to tumble during the day.  I agreed to place a £50 bet on their behalf at early morning prices.  The information was then given ready for the next day when the horse was due to run.  Early that morning I checked the price, and it was no where near 7/2, not even close.  In fact, it was 5/4!  At this price I refused to get involved as, for me, the risk was entirely out of proportion to the potential reward.  I immediately phoned the office and explained the situation, and the fact that I had specifically told them I would not bet on a short priced favourite.  I was informed that as the info had been given, the bet MUST be placed.  Again, I explained my position and referred them to the previous conversation at which point I was put on hold and then cut off!  I called back, was put through to the office manager and had the same conversation all over again.  I explained the bet would not be placed and was told that someone would call me that afternoon to discuss the matter further but I received no such call….well, not until a few days later (after the horse had won)

The conversation that followed was quite lengthy over 20 minutes I think, starting with their question of ‘did I back it?’ or words to that effect. My negative response and explanation as to both the reasons and the fact that I’d told them my intentions prior to the race twice over did not alter their stance  that information had been given, a deal was done , it was not their fault that the info had fallen into the public domain, they had no control on price/betting odds and that they still expected to be paid.  My reaction was to refuse payment as I’d made no profit, the bet specifically was of a type that I had told them I did not want and that prior to the race because of the massive difference in prospective price (defined to myself) and available price any deal was now off as what I could be getting was not to brochure, as it were.  These type of arguments were water off a ducks back, they still wanted paying.  Not surprisingly, I refused.  Then came the mild insults and threats. The verbals were not paticularly harsh, things like …”a lack of honour..” nothing for me to lose sleep over, I’ve heard worse and been called worse, I’m sure.  The threats?  They threatened legal action, sending this case through to both their lawyers and a debt collection agency.  By this time, I was getting a little ticked with the conversation, I’d made nothing from this horse and got a deal of grief.  I told them to do their worst, then hung up.

About one month later I received another call from them.  To paraphrase, the operator asked me to firstly clarify my position with regard to the bet.  This done he then asked if my position/opinion/intentions had changed.  My reply was that the circumstances had not changed thus my position would not.  To me my position should have been clear to them before the race.  This type of bet I did not want; again, I got the ‘info had been given in good faith ‘.. line and that payment was now due. They spoke of all conversations being recorded and I had a clear obligation to them.  If everything was recorded I stated, then you would have known exactly what had passed , when it passed and why it had passed.  Whatever, I stated, my risk outweighed the benefits and I was being offered something that I did not want. I would pay them nothing.

This was another long, old call 20-30 mins.  Ironically enough the term that sticks in my memory was being called a ‘conman’ – everything else passes into the headache that the call(s) became. I was told that from 5:00 p.m. that evening my case would be formally handed to a debt collection agency who would deal with the matter and that I’d end up losing more than the money I owed them.

Initially, I contacted these guys wondering ‘what if’.  I was still wondering ‘what if’ when I got in touch with Online Betting Exposed. The ‘what if’ however was: ‘what if’…they actually could carry out their threat.  My advice to anyone now would be simple: don’t get involved”

I am not inclined to give out details of the particular ‘tipster’ involved as I want to protect the identity of the person who emailed this account as much as possible.  However, this should be a warning to anyone considering getting involved with such tipsters.  They are not what they seem.  Firstly, as Paul stated in his recent review of odds to tipsters, there is absolutely no value in any bet you make with their information, and secondly, the above account is the kind of headache you can expect when you get involved.

Music Show

While the European 2000 Guineas winners fight it out in the St James’s Palace Stakes on the opening day of the meeting, the fillies have their scrap later in the week – on the Friday – to determine the best female miler in Europe.

The Coronation Stakes is also a Group 1 race that is run on the round course and, like the colts’ version, usually attracts runners that have been contesting the Guineas in England, France, Ireland and occasionally Germany.

With all of the last ten winners having contested at least one Guineas race it looks the obvious place to start.

Seven of those winners had run at Newmarket where they had finished: 1120561, two had run in France: 23 and three in Ireland: 115. Interestingly only one winner had run at both Newmarket and the Curragh.

Winners of the Newmarket 1000 Guineas finished: 5116981, Irish: 8101087, French: 4302834 and German: 102

The French version is by far the weakest of the four European Guineas as it has seen all eight winners to have tried in the last fifteen years, fail. That said, Banks Hill did win the Coronation Stakes in 2001 having been beaten into second place in the French 1000 Guineas. She ran in, and won, a race between her Longchamp and Ascot efforts and beat her French 1000 Guineas conqueror out of sight in the Coronation Stakes rematch.

We can’t really discard the French winner this year as she also won at Newmarket (albeit both races were won in the Stewards room) but we will concentrate solely on those fillies to have run in one of the four European Guineas races.

We are also looking for a horse that has won over 7f or 1m in their career.

This leaves us with fourteen of the 31 runners currently declared for the race.

From this group, we ought to look to those who had won at Group 3 level or above (the last ten winners all had) and, like ten of the last 11 winners, could boast a win in one of their last three runs.

We’ll consider Jacqueline Quest the ‘winner’ of the 1000 Guineas to give us nine remaining at this stage.

We’re left with nine for our shortlist and, with a few of them having alternative engagements, this looks tricky to play. However, the two I like most are: Music Show and Sent From Heaven

AIRLIE STUD GALLINULE STAKES

(GROUP 3) (2YO)

10f

THIS RACE WAS MADE OPEN ONLY TO 3YO’S IN 2004, BEFORE THAT IT WAS A 3YO+ RACE.

8 LOSING FILLYS/MARES’ IN THE LAST 6 RENEWALS.

RECORD OF FILLYS/MARES’ – 4560964L.

5 OF THE LAST 6 WINNERS HAD A PRE RACE RPR OF 94+.

THE LAST 6 WINNERS WERE SINGLE FIGURE PRICES.

5 OF THE LAST 6 FAVOURITES FINISHED 1ST OR 2ND LTO.

4 WINNING IRISH BREDS IN THE LAST 6 RENEWALS’.

5 OF THE LAST 6 WINNERS’ HAD USA BRED STALLIONS.

THE LAST 6 WINNERS HAD 2 OR MORE CAREER RUNS.

5 OF THE LAST 6 WINNERS HAD RUN THAT SEASON.

THE LAST 6 WINNERS FINISHED IN THE FIRST 3 LTO.

5 OF THE LAST 6 WINNERS WERE RUNNING WITHIN 21 DAYS.

FROM THE LAST 6 WINNERS, 5 WERE PRICED 11/4 OR LESS LTO.

AIDEN O’BRIEN – THE LAST 6 YEARS.

12 RUNNERS – 5 WINNERS – 2 PLACED.

WON THE LAST 4 RENEWALS.

WON 5 OF THE LAST 6 RENEWALS.

FINSHED 2ND IN 2005.

2 OF HIS 5 WINNERS RAN IN A CLASSIC TRIAL AT GOWRAN PARK IN APRIL.

VERDICT

Icon Dream and Zayaan have interesting form, especially the latter, whose 3/4l behind Free Judgement (2nd behind Canford Cliffs yesterday) could turn out to be decent form. SHINTO is well thought of by his connections and has a Irish Derby entry.The worry is that his win last time out doesn’t give great encouragement as the three he beat have all been well beaten since.(Tony McCormick)

3.35

TATTERSALLS GOLD CUP STAKES

(GROUP 1) (4YO+)

10f

7 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS WERE AGED 4.

THE LAST 8 WINNERS WERE SINGLE FIGURE PRICES’.

6 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS WERE IRISH BRED.

FAVOURITES’ WERE BEATEN IN 6 OF THE LAST 8.

6 OF THE LAST 8 WERE IRISH TRAINED.

1 WINNING MARE IN THE LAST 8 RENEWALS.

5 OF THE LAST 8 HAD RUN THAT SEASON.

HORSES FINISHING IN THE FIRST 4 LTO HAVE WON 6 OF THE LAST 8 RENEWALS.

5 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS WERE RUNNING WITHIN 30 DAYS.

THE LAST 8 WINNERS HAD WON A G2 OR A G1.

7 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS HAD RUN AT THE CURRAGH.

THE LAST 8 WINNERS HAD BEEN TRIED AT GROUP 1 LEVEL AT LEAST TWICE.

JUST 1 GB TRAINED WINNER IN THE LAST 8 RENEWALS.

AIDEN O’BRIEN HAS WON 3 OF THE LAST 7 GOLD CUPS.

HORSES OFFICIALLY RATED BETWEEN 118 & 124 HAVE WON 4 OF THE LAST 5 RENEWALS.

VERDICT

Should be pretty straight forward for FAME AND GLORY here, with Irish Derby 5th and under-rated Recharge to chase him home at a big price.(Tony McCormick)

4.10

ETIHAD AIRWAYS IRISH 1000 GUINEAS

(GROUP 1) (FILLIES)

8f

HORSES DRAWN 1 – 4 ARE JUST 1 WIN AND ZERO PLACES’ FROM 24 WIN AND PLACE POSITIONS’.

6 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS WERE A SINGLE FIGURE PRICE.

OF THE 24 WIN AND PLACE POSITIONS, 13 HAD A DOUBLE FIGURE DRAW.

2 OF THE LAST 3 FAVOURITES HAVE WON.

THE LAST 4 WINNERS WERE IRISH BRED.

IRISH TRAINED HORSES’ HAVE TAKEN 6 OF THE LAST 8 RENEWALS.

7 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS HAD 4 OR MORE CAREER WINS.

HORSES’ THAT HAD 1-2 RUNS THAT SEASON, HAVE WON 7 OF THE LAST 8 IRISH 1,000 GUINEAS’.

6 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS WERE RUNNING WITHIN 21 DAYS.

7 WINNERS FROM THE LAST 8 RENEWALS HAD BEEN TRIED AT THE DISTANCE.(4 HAD WON)

6 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS HAD EITHER WON OR HAD FINISHED IN THE FIRST 3 N A GROUP 1.

HORSES’ OFFICIALLY RATED 108 – 120 HAVE WON 5 OF THE LAST 8 GUINEAS’.

7 OF THE LAST 8 WINNERS’ HAD BEEN TRIED AT GROUP 1 LEVEL.

HORSES’ RUNNING IN EITHER THE FRENCH OR ENGLISH GUINEAS’ HAVE TAKEN 6 OF THE LAST 8 RENEWALS.

THE BRITISH RAIDERS’ ARE 2 WINS AND 1 PLACE FROM 20 ATTEMPTS’.

PIVOTAL HAS SIRED 2 WINNERS IN THE LAST 5 RENEWALS.

AIDEN O’BRIEN IS 2 WINNERS AND 3 PLACES FROM 26 RUNNERS IN THE LAST 8 RENEWALS’.

DERMOT WELD IS 1 WINNER AND 1 PLACE FROM 11 RUNNERS’.

DAVID WATCHMAN IS 1 WINNER AND 1 PLACE FROM 6 RUNNERS’.

VERDICT

I’d be more interested in Termagant if she had the benefit of a run this season. Lillie Langtry has Johnny Murtagh up, but do horses’ come back from a bad injury to take a Guineas? Lady Springbank could go well at a big price, while, MUSIC SHOW led those from a bad draw at Newmarket and will take all the beating here for an English Guineas double weekend.(Tony McCormick)

Here are a few simple guidelines to follow:

1. When discussing betting systems please try your best not to give too many of the system rules away as this is obviously a public forum. It’s absolutely fine to discuss different aspects of the systems, but if you go into too much detail we may have to edit your comments.

2. Please refrain from posting negative comments about any system or service that may be deemed slanderous by the vendor, unless you have good reason to do so. If you wish to report a vendor for operating illegally or unethically please contact us and we’ll look into it for you.

3. As always, we encourage you to participate on every area of our website, but you should note that all comments are moderated and for the good of everyone who visits we simply can’t tolerate bad language, or any other kind of abusive behaviour, so please act responsibly.

And finally, we’ve set up this section so that you’ve got a handy place to come to for chatting about anything betting related that doesn’t quite slot into any other category, so please don’t let this stop you from commenting on the individual reviews we’ve posted in other sections as that’s what they’re there for and your feedback is always more than welcome.

Today sees the start of a new trial over here at OBE HQ. The Favourites Phenomenon System (herein known as FP System for obvious reasons) has been a sneaky little blighter. I first heard of it a few weeks ago, before its release, but then all was silent for a while. It was only last week I found out it had actually found it’s way onto the market……and I haven’t had a single email about it.

So, what can I tell you about this FP System? Well, first off it’s penned by Matt Watson, who is undoubtedly one of the nicest guys I’ve dealt with in the world of sports betting. In the couple of days I’ve had the system to look at, he’s already responded in a ridiculously timely manner to any query I’ve had and is totally open about his system and his hopes for the good folks that purchase it.

Secondly, it is a backing system, a ridiculously easy backing system…so ridiculously easy that I had to read it twice, nae, thrice to ensure I’d actually understood it. I thought I’d missed something, that there was no way that what I had read was the actual system, but it was and is, and that’s a good thing!

Thirdly, and this is where people skip a page, it’s a Stop At A Winner system. WAIT! Don’t hit back on your browser, not just yet, anyway. We’ve never fully trialled a SAW system on OBE before, because they are generally a one way ticket straight to the poor house, no passing ‘Go’, no collecting £200. But there is a very good reason they lead straight there, and that is plain and simple poor money management, which is where this system differs from most others.

I should say here that The FP System is more than just a system, it doesn’t arrive on your doormat in glossy brochure form, it’s so much more than that.  I am genuinely excited about what Matt is trying to achieve here, he has set up a website that is designed to educate the punter, rather than simply sell them a system. And oh, what a gloriously simple system it is. On my first read through, I skipped straight to the rules and missed out the first few pages. My first thought was ‘this can’t be for real, nothing this simplistic will ever make money.’

I then read through the whole thing, from start to finish, and realised that Matt had actually done a fair bit of research before embarking on this journey, and that he did actually have a good point, and that the system may be better than I first thought. In fact, using the recommended stop loss should see us profit in 98% of our betting days. There won’t be a bet everyday as one of the things Matt is big on is discipline. A quick pre-race check will tell me if I’ll be dabbling in the market or not on any particular day.

So, the system, as I’ve said, is simple, so simple that my 7 year old wee lad could do it, seriously! It comes with a choice of stop losses, 5, 7 or 9 bets (5 being the recommended for newbies). The Favourites part of the title tells you we’re dealing with favourites, and that my good fellows/fellowesses is pretty much all I need to say – any more and you’d have the system!

So, for the test, we’ll start with the recommended 200 point bank and we’ll go for the full fat, stop loss set at 9 races, using £10 per day as a profit target and a £2000 bank.

Below are the results for the trial, followed by my thoughts on Favourites Phenomenon…

Results

Conclusion

So, that’s the end of our trial of The FP System, and boy oh boy this one has blown me away! When I first read the system rules and found out it was a Stop At A Winner (SAW) system, I figured we’d all be heading to the poor house – I was wrong, oh so wrong!

This is the first SAW system I’ve ever seen that has been properly researched and is based on sound racing statistics. There’s no ’stable gambles’, inside info or any of that bull, it’s just plain old statistics and I LIKE that! Add in the fact that Matt is an all-round nice guy and offers the best customer service we’ve ever seen and it was obvious we were on to a winner!

I said in my opening review that what Matt was offering was so much more than a system and I still stand by that. His customer support is second to none, and each email he sends gives a little bit of advice and let’s you see inside the mind of a professional punter. Anyone considering taking up this game full time could do a lot worse than listen to what Matt has to say.

So, we spent around 40 days testing The FP System and had a total of 30 days actual betting. In those 30 days we banked a total of 30 points profit, and most days my ‘work’ was all done and dusted within two or three races. Occasionally, I had to play in five races – not exactly what I’d call taxing! The biggest single stake I placed was just shy of £70 and the biggest total amount staked on any one day was £120, again nothing to worry about there — especially if you follow Matt’s money management advice and set up the correct bank. If spending an hour in front of your PC sounds too much like hard work, have no fear! Matt has designed a bot that will do ALL the work for you! It is currently awaiting Betfair approval, which is expected anytime now and when released will make the job even easier — can’t say fairer than that!

So, do we here at OBE recommend The FP System?? We absolutely 100% recommend The FP System as an essential part of any serious punters portfolio, not just because the system is so good, but because of the support and advice that comes with it…

Learn More About The FP System…

I started this test using a 50 point bank and on day 30 of the test I was scrolling through the book and stopped, by chance, at a rather important line in the system. The line went “…we suggest a betting bank of ‘20′ points.” Hmm, the quick amongst you will realise that I cocked my bank up by oh 30 points or so! Not to worry though as it means the decent profit we achieved would have actually been 2.5 times more profitable, and that’s at SP! If I’d followed that 20 point bank, I’d have more than doubled my starting bank in 30 betting days!

Now that really is impressive!

The month started on a rather decent note, winning a reasonable profit in the first couple of days and I was bumbling along nicely. Then, I hit a 5 day run of losers which took the bank into the red, followed by a small win then another couple of poor days. I think it was at this point that someone commented about how unsurprised they were that the results had nosedived as they’d seen the system and it had no real selection criteria of any worth. I didn’t agree that the selection criteria had no worth, but I was beginning to doubt The Legacy And Saver System was any good!

My doubts were quickly quashed when I banked over £180 within the next two days! The rest of the trial was a bit up and down, but I was always winning more than I was losing and, in the last week particularly, the system was incredibly consistent, netting profit almost every day….not always huge amounts, but little and often will do for me!

At the end of the trial, I had netted a grand total of £429.94 to £20 stakes (or 20.5 points) and a 50 point bank. Had I split my £1000 into 20 units, that total would have actually been £1074.85 which is quite astounding! However, before we get all excited there’s a BIG health warning to be had….if I had indeed split my bank into just 20 units I would have (at the worst point of the month) had just £100 left in my account! Now, I’m a big bad ugly brute when it comes to betting (some would say I’m just a big bad ugly brute), and I’ve had my fair share of nervous bank situations, however, had I got to that point I’d have been a little worried, and probably a tad upset! So, yes you can certainly do it with a 20 point bank, but me personally, I’d use no less than the 50 points.

To recap, The Legacy And Saver System is two backing systems given as one. For the test, I used the Racing Post online edition and spent absolutely no more than 15 minutes a day finding my selections and then placed them at SP. The book does recommend taking the second show of live show odds (apparently has proven more profitable), but for simplicity I just took SP. So, for a grand total of 20 minutes work per day, I was paid £42.99 per hour! Surely that beats working for a living

At the start of the trial, and during the first week or so in particular, I really expected to be slating The Legacy And Saver System, but it’s proven me wrong, and has to be recommended. There isn’t many systems out there that can produce 20 points profit for 20 minutes work a day. I, for one, will continue to use it daily!

Bet Accelerator is a simple laying system, looking to lay solely odds on favourites, which is always a good thing, as long as the selection system is strong enough, and the selection criteria for Bet Accelerator does look strong enough, as shown by the 17.5 point profit.

However, I do have a few gripes about the system and I’ll start right back at the book itself. I get fed up of systems that are padded to the extreme with the usual junk about Betfair, odds, backing, laying, blah, blah, blah and I have to say Bet Accelerator is no different. Benjamin has taken a slightly different approach and included some other chapters like ‘The Enjoyment of Sports Betting’ or ‘The Money in UK Horse Racing’ – I’m sorry but I DON’T NEED THAT!!! It is a full 20 pages before I get to the four page selection chapter (which is actually summed up in one page)! Why not just give me the selection chapter/page early on and then if I really want to read all the other padding I can do so at leisure. In the interest’s of fairness, I should say that it’s not only Benjamin who pads out his ebooks, it’s a rather painful trait that seems to have been adopted by pretty much every system writer, but I really think it’s time they stopped it. All I want is the system strategy, pure and simple!

Secondly, I think “Accelerator” is a little bit ambitious! I’d be inclined to call it more like ‘Bet Pension Fund’ or ‘Bet Snail’ or ‘Bet Lada’ or something similar. Yes, you will profit from it, but I think it may be just a little slow, and certainly not akin to any accelerator I’ve ever used.

My final, and biggest, gripe is that it’s a live market system, and if you’re going to use a live market system, then you at least want some action! There’s nothing worse than sitting by a computer all day and placing no bets! To be fair, it’s not every day you have to sit by your PC as you’ll know the night before what meetings, if any, you have to keep an eye on, and you’ll have a rough idea whether you’re likely to have a bet or not, but you do still have to double check it at the off.

And so, Bet Accelerator…..do I recommend it? Well, it’s hard not to really since it did throw a decent profit in my direction, and 17 points is a very decent profit! Me personally though? I won’t be using it. I just don’t have the time nor the patience to sit watching races come and go without any action. If it was set and forget, then absolutely I’d recommend it but it’s not and that is a big negative! I certainly think more profit could be pulled from it with a lower betting bank probably around half of the recommended 150 points (am I really saying this??) but I don’t think that even that could persuade me. If you’ve the patience and the time to sit and wait on the bets coming your way then Bet Accelerator may very well be just the ticket, if you like even a modicum of action, then I’d suggest you look elsewhere.

I was grateful to open the system document (in Word format) and find I had no more than 10 pages to work through and the last two are the past results…lovely! My first read through took just 10 minutes, with a further read through to make sure I was understanding what the author was saying. No problems here, and it was nice to see the logic behind the system too. For the test (and to save me time cos I’m a lazy sod) I mainly used the free selection telephone line that’s provided with the system.

I only bet in 18 days of the last month, which surprised me a little. What surprised me more was the profit I’ve pulled in that time – a few pennies shy of £860…in 18 days…..WOW! The test started well with profit arriving over the first few days of betting before hitting a particularly bad day where I dropped £204 and wiped out all but £8 of my profit. However, from there on in Refuse To Lose showed it has real potential by going on a particularly strong run of consistency. Sure, there were losers in there but they were well covered by the amount of winners.

Refuse To Lose utilises a conservative loss recovery plan, only ever aiming to recover lost stakes before looking for profit again. This is a relatively safe way of protecting both profits and bank, but because we’re dutching the selections here, you do need a substantial bank and I think the 1000 points RTL recommends is about right. The worst stage in the test did see the bank take a bit of a nosedive and the stakes did get a bit on the high side, but that’s the very reason for recommending a big bank.

So…£860 profit in 18 days to £2 stakes…or 430 points profit! But don’t go getting too carried away, as one of the ’secrets’ of the system is the varied staking that comes with it. It’s not one point stakes you use, you will use anywhere between 20 and 80 points and most will be between 60 and 75 points per bet but with the high strike rate, that really is nothing to worry about. Speaking of the strike rate, it is claimed to be in the region of 80%, but our trial had a 69.5% S/R. That doesn’t worry me as we only had 23 bets so it’s hardly a significant sample.

Overall, it’s a thumbs up for Refuse To Lose. The methodology is sound, it’s well written, clear, concise and moreover, highly PROFITABLE and I don’t foresee the selection method letting us down in the future either as it’s based on stats, and stats are good