Lucky 7EVEN – Final Review
I was given a copy of the system by the author upon the release and I hope this provides sufficient information to whether the system is appropriate for your style of betting.
So, the price is currently £29 but the web site indicates a rise to £49. (It actually says increases will occur in 3 days, but I have had the system for 3 days and the increase has not occurred!!!) The package consists of a 12-page PDF copy of the system (meaning it is accessible) there is also an email service, which forwards selections, without using the manual selection process (although the system is simple, these services are useful). The service is offered for a single payment of £39.95.
The presentation is professional, with screen shots of sites used to make selections. Although the system is only 12 pages, it is precise and concise with no padding to make the manual seem more appealing. However, there are comments made in following section regarding the system (see below). The system uses only 3 selection steps!!! And everything is covered in how to make selections. In the manual, each step includes clear screen shots and instructions; and has web links to areas where information can be found. (I have reservations regarding the system, but this is covered later). The manual also contains a money management system, which is essential when making profits from gambling; and seems to use a common sense approach. The price seems acceptable for this type of manual, but attention needs to be given to the sales pitch regarding increasing the price.
So, any adverse comments:?! Well, when initially reading the system, it indicates 2 distances on which selections are made (sorry if being vague, but I am trying not to reveal the exact system). It became slightly confusing whether these were 2 specific distances, or whether the system uses races falling between these distances. It only became clear when the author gave an example. Inserting the word “between”, when giving distances, would prevent this confusion and provide faith in the system (which sadly is lacking – but more later)
Another comment; the author advises to flit around the racing post web site, to obtain various selection information. However, click on the days first race meet, scroll through to find possible selections, click on the race, then click the selected horse to obtain information required. This is much easier and all information is available from the race card. This flitting about (not necessary) dilutes the faith I have in this system. These may seem trivial, but I feel, systems presented to paying punters, must be accurate and time effective. If this system used more than 3 steps to make selections, this would not be the case. Tweaking the manuals presentation is needed to ensure the system is correctly understood and time management is minimised.
So, what is my initial perception? Well! Firstly. I agree, make systems as simple as possible so bets can be tunefully placed. I also agree with not “padding” manuals with irrelevant information – i.e. including lengthy autobiographies; or how to use betfair; or a lengthy synopsis of how systems were developed; but this system takes streamlining to a new degree. We need some author credentials of experience and knowledge, which allow them to produce systems. We also need brief descriptions of how systems developed and data proving systems work. Without this, I become very sceptical and this was my reaction on first reading.
Honestly; it seems the author picked his lucky number, then devised what seems “a fad system” to accompany this. The web site claims have little, if any long term proof of claims, just single winning bets! I expect; at least on web sites; a section showing previous trial statistics for claims being made. The web site claims this system is no gimmick, but is exactly how it feels, with no counterclaims to defend the system!!! However, I said I would test the system and “ours is not to reason why, ours is just to buy and try”. So, will it stand real live testing?
To be honest, the system is self-explanatory and using only 3 steps, can be executed over a whole race card in minutes. However, as mentioned, I have reservations, as the system seems too simplistic. It does not seem to use sufficient data to enable it to be taken seriously, but live tests will prove whether this system produces high success rates.
Results of implementing System!
N.B. For the purpose of the trial, and because I do not always use betfair, I am using the rule; one quarter odds for a second place and one fifth odds for third and fourth place. Using this ensures consistency. I am starting with a £500 account, using the simple money management system the manual provides i.e. each way bets of 1 betting stake win and 1 betting stake place for all races.
11 Dec 2009
18.50 – Wolverhampton – All Of Me [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 11/1
20.50 – Wolverhampton – Feeling [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 14/1
Staking plan gains/losses -4 staking points
12 Dec 2009
12.40 – SOUTHWELL – JONNIE SKULL [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 15/8F
14.40 – SOUTHWELL – DISTANT DREAMER [USA] – Not placed – 9th – 50/1
15.30 – SOUTHWELL – NAOMH GEILEIS [USA] – Placed 3rd – 13/8 Jt F
18.20 – WOLVERHAMPTON – GOODBYE CASH [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 14/1
18.50 – WOLVERHAMPTON – LUCKYDOLLY [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 16/1
20.50 – WOLVERHAMPTON – JUST BOND [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 3/1
Staking plan gains/losses -10.675 staking points
N.B. The email selection service gives the second race as 14.40, but the actual race should be the 14.20???
13 Dec 2009
17.25 – KEMPTON – LUCKY SCORE [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 5/1
Staking plan gains/losses -2 staking points
14 Dec 2009
17.50 – WOLVERHAMPTON - KING´S JESTER [IRE] – Not placed – 10th – 33/1
Staking plan gains/losses -2 staking points
15 Dec 2009
13.40 – SOUTHWELL – GAILY NOBLE [IRE] – Not placed – 8th – 12/1
15.10 – SOUTHWELL – DESERT MILE [IRE] – Not placed – 9th – 50/1
Staking plan gains/losses -4 staking points
16 Dec 2009
12.30 – LINGFIELD – FREDDIE´S GIRL [USA] – Finished 2nd – 22/1
13.00 – LINGFIELD – ROCK THE STARS [IRE] – Not placed – 9th – 16/1
14.10 – LINGFIELD – SHARPAZMAX [IRE] – Not places – last – 5/1
14.45 – LINGFIELD – BINNION BAY [IRE] – Non runner – No bet
18.20 – KEMPTON – JAZZ AGE [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 33/1
Staking plan gains/losses -0.5 staking points
17 Dec 2009
14:30 – Southwell – Mcconnel [USA] – Won – 4/9F
15:30 – Southwell – Plenilune [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 25/1
17:00 – Wolverhampton – Battimoore [IRE] – Not placed – 9th – 14/1
17:30 – Wolverhampton – Creevy [IRE] – Not placed – 6th – 16/1
18:00 – Wolverhampton – Red Somerset [USA] – Not placed – 9th – 33/1
Staking plan gains/losses -6.44 staking points
18 Dec 2009
15.15 – SOUTHWELL – LUISA TETRAZZINI [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 9/1
18.20 – WOLVERHAMPTON – ELLA WOODCOCK [IRE] – Not places – 5th – 9/4
19.50 – WOLVERHAMPTON – RAVI RIVER [IRE] – Not placed – 6th – 14/1
Staking plan gains/losses -6 staking points
19 Dec 2009
12.50 – LINGFIELD – MINORTRANSGRESSION [USA] – Not placed – 4th – 20/1
13.55 – LINGFIELD – STRIKER TORRES [IRE] – Won – 15/2
14.30 – LINGFIELD – SAPHIRA´S FIRE [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 5/2
15.30 – WOLVERHAMPTON – CONCORDE KISS [USA] – Not placed – 5th – 50/1
16.00 – WOLVERHAMPTON – BACK TO PARIS [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 8/1
Staking plan gains/lossed +3.375 staking points
N.B. The 13.55 was actually held at Wolverhampton and not Lingfield
20 Dec 2009
15.45 – KEMPTON – LITENUP [IRE] – Not placed –9th – 33/1
16.15 – KEMPTON – WINTER FEVER [SAF] – Not placed – Last – 50/1
Staking plan gains/losses -4 staking points
21 Dec 2009
14.30 – KEMPTON – DVINSKY [USA] – Not placed – 6th – 7/1
16.05 – KEMPTON – BAUNAGAIN [IRE] – Finished 3rd – 33/1
Staking plan gains/losses +4.6 staking points
22 Dec 2009
12:55 – Southwell – Ingleby Arch [USA] – Finished 2nd – 7/2
Staking plan gains/losses +0.875 staking points
N.B. No racing until 26 Dec
26 Dec 2009
15:20 – Wolverhampton – WELLMARKED [IRE] – Won – 9/2
16:25 – Wolverhampton – SUPERCAST [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 16/1
Staking plan gains/losses +5.625 staking points
27 Dec 2009
14:50 – SOUTHWELL – FLORES SEA [USA] – Not placed – 8th – 11/2
15:25 – SOUTHWELL – CONVINCE [USA – None runner
Staking plan gains/losses -2 staking points
28 Dec 2009
14:40 – WOLVERHAMPTON – SWISS ART [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 11/1
15:45 – WOLVERHAMPTON – RUBENSTAR [IRE] – Finished 2nd – 14/1
16:15 – WOLVERHAMPTON – SIR GEORGE [IRE] – Finished 2nd – 5/2F
17:15 – WOLVERHAMPTON – LINDY HOP [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 25/1
Staking plan gains/losses +0.125 staking points
N.B. No email service was sent today (even though this is a paid for service).
29 Dec 2009
No selections today
30 Dec 2009
12.20 – Lingfield – MAY PARKIN [IRE] – None runner
15.35 – Lingfield – DEN´S GIFT [IRE] – Finished 2nd – 5/2F
Staking plan gains/losses +0.625 staking points
31 Dec 2009
12.30 – Lingfield – KATCHMORE [IRE] – Finished 2nd – 15/2
13.30 – Lingfield – BOOKIES INDEX GIRL [IRE] – Won – 11/1
15.30 – Lingfield – BAUNAGAIN [IRE] – Not placed – 6th – 15/2
Staking plan gains/losses +15.625 staking points
1 Jan 2010
14.40 – Southwell – CITY GOSSIP [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 5/2
Staking plan gains/losses -2 staking points
2 Jan 2010
12.55 – Southwell – TAMASOU [IRE] – Finished 3rd – 11/2
13.05 – Lingfield – ANT MUSIC [IRE] – Finished 3rd – 7/1
14.10 – Lingfield – DR WINTRINGHAM [IRE] – Not placed – 9th – 9/2
14.40 – Lingfield – ERINJAY [IRE] – None runner
Staking plan gains/losses +0.5 staking points
3 Jan 2010
14.35 – Kempton – MISTER GREEN [IRE] – Not placed – 5th – 4/1JF
16.35 – Kempton – THE MOUSE CARROL [IRE] – Not placed – 6th – 33/1
Staking plan gains/losses -4 staking points
4 Jan 2010
15.35 – WOLVERHAMPTON – QUINCE [IRE] – None runner
16.35 – WOLVERHAMPTON – MIGHTY MOVER [IRE] – Not placed – 7th – 7/1
17.05 – WOLVERHAMPTON – PUSH ME [IRE] – Finished 3rd – 8/1
Staking plan gains/losses -0.4 staking points
N.B. No email service received, even though selections available.
5 Jan 2010
13.40 – Southwell - JONNIE SKULL [IRE] – None runner
14.10 – Southwell – BORASCO [USA] – Finished 2nd – 5/2F
Staking plan gains/losses +0.625 staking points
N.B. Email service arrived but said for 3 Jan not 5 Jan???
6 Jan 2010
13.00 – Lingfield – RONDEAU [GR] – Cancelled
14.00 – Lingfield – HALLINGDAL [UAE] – Cancelled
14.30 – Lingfield – CREEVY [IRE] – Cancelled
15.00 – Lingfield – BETTER BE BLUE [IRE] – Cancelled
17.20 – Kempton – MAFEKING [UAE] – Cancelled
18.50 – Kempton – VAINGLORY [USA] – Cancelled
N.B. Due to severe weather conditions, Lingfield and Kempton races abandoned
7 Jan 2009
15.10 – Southwell – PLENILUNE [IRE] – Not placed – Last – 7/1
Staking plan gains/losses -2 staking points
8 Jan 2009
15.30 – LINGFIELD – WOOLSTON FERRY [IRE] – Not placed – 9th – 20/1
16.00 – LINGFIELD – GREY BOY [GER] – Not placed – 6th – 20/1
13.45 – SOUTHWELL – GRACIES GIFT [IRE] – Not placed – Last – 5/2
14.45 – SOUTHWELL – SAIRAAM [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 13/2
Staking plan gains/losses -8 staking points
N.B. No email service received, even though selections available
9 Jan 2009
13.55 – KEMPTON – PLAYFUL ASSET [IRE] – Not placed – 4th – 6/1
15.55 – KEMPTON – HATHAWAY [IRE] – Finished 3rd – 8/1
15.10 – LINGFIELD – LEARO DOCHAIS [USA] – Not placed – 5th – 10/1
Staking plan gains/losses -2.4 staking points
N.B. No email service received, even though selections available
10 Jan 2009
No selections today
N.B. No email service received.
11 Jan 2009
15.30 – Wolverhampton – JUST JIMMY [IRE] – Not placed – 7th – 5/1
16.45 – Kempton – VALENTINO SWING [IRE] – None runner
17.15 – Kempton – CAVALRY GUARD [USA] – Not placed – 6th – 16/1
14.15 – Kempton – CAPTAIN COOL [IRE] – Finished 2nd – 7/2
Staking plan gains/losses -3.125 staking points
12 Jan 2009
15.05 – Lingfield – DREAM EXPRESS [IRE] – Not placed – 8th – 6/1
Staking plan gains/losses -2 staking points
13 Jan 2009
18.45 – KEMPTON – DESERT DREAMER [IRE] – Not placed – 7th – 12/1
Staking plan gains/losses -2 staking points
N.B. No email service arrived, even though selections available.
14 Jan 2009
14.30 – LINGFIELD – TAKAJAN [IRE] – Finished 2nd – 7/2
14.50 – SOUTHWELL – VERTIGO ON COURSE [IRE] – Finished 3rd – 5/1
Staking plan gains/losses +1.875 staking points
N.B. No email service arrived, even though selections available.
The author includes money management with the system. In my opinion, all betting systems should include money management, as this determines potential losses, which may occur. The money management seems adequate, but with my scepticism of the system, my initial bankroll is £500 (common when testing new systems) and I indicate daily gains/losses, to compare strike rates. As mentioned, I will see if the system lives up to its claims under live test conditions, seeing if the money management system is sufficient.
Unlike the rest of this review, this section was completed after the test period. I feel this only fair, to test the system as originally intended. Here are my opinions.
Overall stats
System tested over 32 days (as 2 days had no runners)
System produced –33.69 staking points = -£168.45 if using money management
System had 4 wins; 9 second places; and 7 third places from 82 selections
System gives strike rate of 24.39%
System would produce laying strike rate of 95.12%
The system author uses extremely limited data to choose horses and this seems the reason for astonishingly low strike rate (24.39%) and total losses of £168.45 from the initial starting bank using £5 stakes as suggested. Considering statistics, the author would produce much better strike rates as a laying system and would certainly have been in profit. As my initial suspicions indicated, this system probably produces similar strike rates to ones choosing favourite numbers to back horses, or even choosing horses blindfolded. As a laying system, it would produce much more profit, but I feel credibility is lacking and lay results only arose by chance. I suggest not even purchasing this system for lay options as selections are not stable enough, but the lay option would have been a more accurate way to market the system.
System Extras!
As mentioned, an email service is available, but comes at a price. Although email services are convenient, with this system only being 3 steps, I feel this service does not warrant the cost The service states all selections are sent before 11.30 each race day. During testing, this was the case, the latest I received the service was 11.10. However, during the test, there where incidents where wrong information was given for selections, (including times and courses) and incidents where selections where not even sent by email. I feel, when paying for services, these issues should never occur. Information should be thoroughly checked then sent every day regardless, if not, reputations quickly fail. This, along with poor system performance (as seen above) does not provide faith in the system and in my opinion, I would stay well clear if considering as a professional gambling tool.
The upsell e-book entitled Trap the Winner, is based on backing horses and relies on checking the draw bias at certain race courses, obviously this only applies to flat racing. Apart from using some additional criteria from the Racing Post I don’t believe that there is anything new for the experienced punter as draw bias will always be a factor in certain sprint handicaps, especially in large fields. This book is not something I would recommend as a purchase. Disappointingly there are no previous results to show, simply a staking plan showing you how you can win all of this Tax Free money!
CONCLUSION
What can I say? The system, in my opinion, is a complete sham. The web site provides little data to back up claims, and sales letters only provide single instances where wins occurred. This is not good enough, and in my opinion, is a “money making scam” which cheats paying public. Harsh words, but statistics in this report are proof. If back testing stats were available (as with systems I currently use) these would have shown the system is not as good as advertised. Where these excluded so the system had at least some chance of earning the author some quick cash?
The author claims over 20 years betting experience. Sounds good, but I know people having over 40 years experience, however this is always a losing streak! The system uses extremely limited data to select the horses, which over time becomes very damaging to bankroll profits. Most systems I use to produce profit, generally use at least 4 pieces of statistical data to produce selections. Any less and strike rates quickly diminishes to below 50%. A system producing strike rates of below 25% can be considered disastrous. I believe technical date says pure chance produces around 30% strike rate, so it seems picking horses blindfolded would produce similar, if not better profits. This, along with unreliability of email service definitely indicates, in my opinion, this “fad” betting system does not enter my library, not even as a laying system. I feel the laying stats were pure chance and I rely on more than chance when placing bets.
Rating 1/5 – Leave well alone and advise colleagues the same. I believe this system a complete waste of money and similar, if not better strike rates could be duplicated devising simple systems yourself, e.g. only choosing jockeys who wear green as their colour and ride Irish horses. Back each horse each way!!! In fact, paper test this, as I feel this rule would produce very similar strike rates as the Lucky seven system
