Sports Betting Club – Final Review
Rating: 
Hi Constables,
After a conversation with the Commissioner, it has been decided to halt the review of the Sports Betting Club after 56 days (8 weeks). Enough evidence has been gained in that time to be able to provide an informed opinion.
I rate this system as neutral (2.5 stars) but would advise people thinking of buying this service to read the below regarding risk and betting bank considerations – I rate it as 2.5 stars as 2 stars would fail it, but at recommended stakes of £100 it made a good profit. 3 stars would pass it, but not everyone could bankroll the bets at those stakes and some may not appreciate the rollercoaster ride that can happen once in a while.
Sports Betting Club is a tipping service from Profit World.
The service currently costs £49.95 a month, and you receive a daily email with tips for Golf, Football (backing, laying and perm/accumulator), Tennis and Golf. During the review, 2 horse racing lays turned up somewhat randomly so they will get a mention as well.
For the purposes of the review, I used a 300 pt bank where 1 pt = £2 – therefore a £600 bank to start with.
Importantly, a £100 per bet basis is advised, so in fairness to the system owners, I will discuss the results as if you were using 1 pt = £100. All bets were staked at 1 pt per selection with the exception of the football perms (staked at 1.2 pts to cover all bets) and Golf each way bets which were staked using 1 pt, but with 0.5 pts on the win and 0.5 pts on the place.
So how did it do?
The final cummulative profit/loss figure was 29.78 pts (or £59.56) for our £2 stakes. This, once again was over 8 weeks which would have seen us paying £99.90 in subscription costs, so a defecit of £40.34.
However, if using the recommended £100 stakes, the profit/loss figure of 29.78 pts becomes £2978 minus £99.90 subscription costs = £2878.10 – much more impressive!
It is clear from the above that this system does not function well at lower stakes. So my first thought is that this is for people with sizeable betting banks. This is probably best demonstrated with the first Saturday’s tips. 9 Football lays which all won. However, the average lay price over the trial was 2.75, so anybody backing these would need (using 2.75 as a guide) a bank of £1575 to cover these at the recommended £100 stakes. In addition, there were 4 football backs (£400 in stakes) and 1 perm/acca (£120 in stakes). So for this 1 day, you would have need £2075 at recommended stakes to back all the tips. (although there was a clear profit of 8.1 pts or £810 on the day). So this covers my one of my two points – betting bank considerations.
The other point to be considered is that of risk.
It would appear that the cornerstone of this service is the golf tips. They come in a variety of ways, backing in two balls, laying in 3 balls and the blockbuster bet – the each way bets on the US/European tournaments. Typically, for each tournament, you are advised to bet 0.5 pts each way on 5 selections (in the masters, there were 6 selections). The odds on the candidates have tended to range from around 5/1 to 80/1, mostly in the 12/1 to 25/1 category.
With 2 tournaments at a time not uncommon, that is 10 each way selections with a total outlay of 10 pts (so a straight £1000 at recommended stakes). There were 2 weeks that define the highs and lows of this risk. Week 6, 10 each way bets, returning 1 place only – with the other golf bets, a loss of -13.2 pts (-£1320 at recommended stakes). Week 7, however, 10 each way bets returning 1 winner and 2 places gave us a profit of +24.37pts (+£2437 at recommended stakes).
So this method contains some volatility which is why I use the term risk. Yes gambling is a risk at all times, but the type of risk (£1000 per tournament) is a risk that only a small percentage of people might be willing to take on.
Once again, I rate this system as neutral, and for the above reasons, people who like a risky gamble and can afford to bankroll the selections are those that might consider this system. I also hope you will see why this doesn’t need to go to it’s full review period, and why I feel I can give an informed opinion on it now.
Any comments welcome.
All the best,
Filed under Betting System Reviews by on Jun 1st, 2010. 
The Specialist Final Review
Rating:
Hi Bloggers
Well after 56 days of reviewing The Specialist, just one area was making a very small profit so I decided to monitor results for another week now I can say that the decision to fail this system/service is justified. The results of the last week if taken into consideration would have meant that the area that was making a little profit is now running at minus 10 points and another 22 points would have been deducted from the Exotic bets.
For the first eight days of the review The Specialist was showing an overall profit of just over 17 points this was thanks to the Back All Selections, by the end of the review it was showing a loss of 30.86 points these are at BFSP, and if you add the Exotic Bets to this, that figure would have been minus 46.79 points. Now if you took results at ISP things would have been worse showing for all 3 staking systems a loss of 78.60 points, and if you take in the price of 149 pounds that SWP is asking for this system you can see why this is a clear failure. So how do the figures compare with the sales page showing last years results the answer is they don’t lets have a look below:
Backing all system selections (2009)
1539 bets producing 392 winners 25% strike rate
Over 380 points to industry SP and over 920 BFSP
Backing all system selections
BST Review Period March 27th to May 22nd 2010
331 bets producing 67 winners 20.24% strike rate
minus 62.76 points to industry SP and minus 30.05 BFSP
Not pretty is it in addition to this the sales page showed Exotic Bets making an additional 298 points, what did the review manage minus 15.93 points for CSF and Exacta was a lot worse with a minus 35.90 points. Now I had high hopes of the Being Selective part, I calculated that it had a 44.54% strike rate last year, how did I do 24.81% now that’s a very big difference so I am very disappointed with this particular section.
Now for last year’s results of Being Selective this is using the 1 and 2 point staking plan:
450 points profit ISP and over 600 points to BFSP from just 483 bets
Review figure:
Minus 11.77 points to ISP and 4.12 points profit to BFSP from 133 bets.
Now to get that figure of plus 4.12 points profit you would have had to stake 200 points this gives you an ROI of 2.06 % you might as well stick the money in the bank.
In conclusion the system relies heavily on getting some long priced winners when they do not occur it struggles. You are expected at times to back 5 or 6 selections in the same race and one of these is a short priced favourite, and for most of my review the low odds won what chance does it has of making any money?, it is just hoping that the outsiders will win. So this is just another SWP product that does not live up to all the hype, maybe it will hit some big odds winners in the forthcoming months but do you want take that chance that it might be lucky, I know I don’t and certainly not at the price of the product. So yet another one for the Jailed and Failed section, open the cell door!
Regards
Sgt Dave
Filed under Betting System Reviews by on Jun 3rd, 2010.
Lay It Safe Review Final Summary
Hi Bloggers
So our review of Lay It Safe, a laying tipster service from Paul Fowlie and promoted by
Sportsworld Publishing comes to an end. Now, let’s start by looking at the claims made
on the SWP sales page:
“A Highly Selective System Laying Low Liability Horses”
Certainly it is highly selective with just 127 selections in 84 days including 31 days (37%)
with no selections at all. Low liability? Not sure I agree with that claim when the only
rule that you are advised is that the maximum lay price should be 9.0. The average BSP
lay price was 5.66 excluding those selections that were too long (43 in total).
The average losing bet BSP was 5.79 and with a strike rate of 76% this confirms this service
will not be profitable in the long term as the maximum price for a strike rate of 76% is 4.0 just to
break even!
“£1000 a Month from Selective Bets, with an 89% Strike Rate”
The subscription to Lay It Safe is £100 for six months (£16.67 per month). The final P/L after
three months was a loss of -24.59 points which is £2,459 if laying at £100 – the stake quoted by
SWP. So you would have invested £50 to lose a further £2,459 ( A total loss of £2,500).
Perhaps SWP meant to say you can LOSE £1000 a Month?
Strike Rate 89%? Don’t think so!
OK, we all know betting systems can go through bad patches and one of the reasons I reviewed this
for three months rather than the usual two months is that Mr. Fowlie almost resisted allowing the
review in the first place. Quote:
” What I don’t want James is you doing a review and then giving it a negative comment because it has not made a profit in the first month you trial it, that is just so unfair.”
No problem, we reviewed it for a full three months with the following P/L for each month:
28 days – 7.32 points
56 days + 4.98 points
84 days - 22.25 points
Total P/L - 24.59 points
I’m pleased I decided to carry on past the normal two months as I might have been persuaded to
recommend Lay It Safe for the Neutral category after 56 days.
But as it is, if you can’t do better than losing 24-25 points in a three month period tipping horses to lose priced up to 8/1 (9.0) then I can only suggest you rethink your strategy.
There was also more than one occasion when the selections website managed to list the wrong course and wrong race times. Surely it’s not too much to expect accuracy when listing selections? At least some attempt was made a few weeks ago to acknowledge the poor run with the following comment on the selections website:
“This system has been very very quiet this year, if come the end of June we still have not made 35 points profit I will extend your membership free of charge until we hit 35 points. I cannot be fairer than that”.
Looks unlikely the 35 points will be achieved so at least existing subscribers get a free membership until profit is achieved. Doesn’t do much for the £2,459 you would already have lost, though!
Recommended for ” Fail and Jail” with no parole or appeal.
[Click Here To See Lay It Safe...] Rating:
Cheers
Sgt Jon
Filed under Betting System Reviews by on Jun 3rd, 2010.
Favourite’s Phenomenon Final Review
Rating: 
– Click to see the FP System!
Hi Bloggers
I have been trying out Favourite’s Phenomenon since March 8th and overall I have been pretty impressed, as per the website this is not a get rich now method but an investment. During the trial I have also had the chance to try out the FP Bot and it proved to be very reliable. I think only on one occasion did it let me down, I just simply reinstalled and was back up and running. Out of the 84 days of the review there was 21 days when there was no betting due mainly to the Maximum Potential Loss limits being exceeded or races over lapping. So out of the remaining 63 days only on two days did any of the Levels fail to get the winner the break down of the different Levels is as follows:
Level 1: 62 Days/59 Days won = 95.23% Strike Rate
Level 2: 47 Days /46 Days won = 98.04% Strike Rate
Level 3: 44 Days/ 43 Days won = 97.75% Strike Rate
Of course you could say you are doing stop at winner (SAW) but the winner came in an average of 2.57 of the qualifying races, so most of the time you had an early finish but you cannot not have a fraction of a race so it is probably best to say either the second or third qualifying race would produce the goods. There have been some comments posted on the blog about having to bet 70 points or even 121 points just to make a one point profit with FP if you follow the manual, program the FP Bot correctly or use the manual calculators provided properly its just not going to happen! Just to back it up the point’s outlay and returns are shown below for each Level:
Level 1: 122.6 points outlay, Profit 41.79 points = ROI 34.13%
Average points outlay per day = 1.98
Level 2: 102 points outlay, Profit 35.94 points = ROI 35.12%
Average points outlay per day = 2.12
Level 3: 130.66 points’ outlay, Profit 19.54 points = ROI 14.95%
Average points outlay per day = 2.97
It can be clearly seen that the outlay especially on Levels 1 and 2 is not that high to obtain 1 point profit, it must be said that the method has safeguards built in to protect the stakes from getting out of control, the FP Bot has them built in and you can adjust them to suit your comfort zone. I personally would use Level 1 as you get more action and losses are a lot lower but as a compromise Level 2 is good as well, the author of the system use Level 3 but I think for most of us the first 2 levels would be sufficient and would provide a steady income. Just to add all profits are shown at Betfair prices and commission has been accounted for in the calculations, although in my review I showed both ISP and BF the author recommends the latter and there was slight advantage during the trial.
So downsides the FP Bot costs 35 pounds a month, but if you have time in the afternoon the system comes with manual calculators which I have used as well. If doing the manual way you need to place your bets close to the off, around 10 seconds or so, I actually set the FP Bot to place bets 5 seconds before the start time. Once again there will
be variations in results on occasions, the results on the website are to Level 3 and depending of course when you do your calculations and place your bets. Another minor issue is that it is so consistent it is a shock when there is a losing day, you tend to get complacent.
So in conclusion based on what has happened over the 12 week review period I would recommend this system and award it four stars, as I have already said it might not suit some people but if you want to earn a steady profit with not much hassle then this could be for you. I personally prefer Levels 1 and 2 if you want to keep the stakes on the lower side, but once again that is up to the individual. So if you do purchase paper trade first read the manual especially for the FP Bot make sure your settings are correct.
Rating:
Matt has gave Betting System Truths readers a voucher worth £25 so that new members that join from Betting System Truths will get the advanced staking plan for free!
The voucher is worth £25 and must be used after checkout when offered the “Advanced Staking Plan” This is no gimmick Matt sells this every day for £25…
Go to: http://irec.ommend.com/favouritesphenomenon/ and add this beauty of a system to your portfolio! We 100% back this product and think it should be in your armoury…
Regards
Sgt Dave
Filed under Betting System Reviews, Passed and Recommended by on Jun 7th, 2010.
Just Lays Final Summary
Rating: 
The review of Martins Better Better or Just Lays as it now called lasted 84 days and while its not the most exciting of services it does deliver, now some people will look at the review and see just a profit of less than 3 Pts after 84 days and wonder why it is not in the failed bin. Well to be honest there were times when I did wonder about the service , it does actually deliver what it says on the site.
After a small loss in March , it did produce a profit of over 5 pts in April and 6 Pts in May , which is on par with previous results.Now the problem is, how many people are going to have the patience and most importantly the disicpline to use a service like this?
This service is really for the larger backer using it as part of portfolio , along with other services doing the same thing, seeking out 5 to 10 pts a month, the professional way to do it. And I can see no reason why this will not keep providing small but consistant profits through out the year.
But for the smaller bettor , after paying the subscription which is £29.99 per month, it might be hard to justify
A bank of 30 pts is recommended by the vendor, and with the longest losing run being just 3, which happened twice , the lowest the bank was down to at any one stage was just under 9 pts, that would not ever have being in danger and especially with just the average odds being 2.95 The longest winning run was 13 once and also winning run of 12. The average strike rate was just over 68%
In regards the quality of the service, it is professionally run , with the emails all without fail reaching my inbox before 11am, giving anybody ample time to place your bet. No need for any bot etc, you can place your bet , making sure it is under the 3.5 max mark, if you did not get to place your in time , all you had to do is to leave it in the inrunning market again keeping it under the 3.5 threashold.I fact in all the 84 days of doing the trial there was only one day when the bet was not matched at either the early price or in the inrunning market
I am going to place this in neutral, and award it 2.5 stars, the service does deliver, does what it claims and is professionally run, but my guess it will not appeal to the vast majority of punters, but to the more professional ones.
Cheers,
Brendan
Rating:
Filed under Betting System Reviews by on Jun 8th, 2010.
The Racing Revelation – Final Review
Rating:
Hi Bloggers
We have come to the end of the review for Racing Revelation and I am dissappointed to say I feel this system has failed to deliver the promises made on their website.
Looking back at the results over this period it had far too many long losing runs and with many winners being short prices then it was always going to be a struggle to make a profit.
It did go through a good period and I thought maybe the bad run was due to the change from NH to Flat but over the last 2 weeks we have found many losers so for anyone to profit from this long term I think it would be very difficult considering the many long losing runs.
I therefore after careful consideration would have to say this system has failed.
Total Cumulative profit / loss : -2.6 points in 84 days…
Thanks for checking this out and hope I have kept you informed on how this system was going.
[You can See The Racing Revelation out Here]
Rating:
Graeme
Filed under Betting System Reviews by on Jun 10th, 2010.