Review 10 February 2019
It seemed that this service might set itself apart from the usual marketing mafia offerings. The claims of high strike rate and return were supported by detailed results although they were not independently proofed and the third party promoters made it appear as though they had tried the service themselves which was most unlikely to be the case.
We were told that the author wanted to “give us a completely new and different approach” but the reality is that this is a standard horse race tipping service aimed at getting subscribers to click on his affiliate links with bookmakers and so allow additional income when the selections do not perform.
New subscribers are welcomed to the service with staking instructions the advice being to allocate a 100 point bank for the service with each tip backed at the 1 point level be it win or each way. A fairly conservative approach when you consider the claims of a 46.5% strike rate historically. Selections are advised by email from Tuesday to Saturdays and if there are no selections this is confirmed.
Selections are normally received mid morning on the day of racing with odds advised generally being available. Around 300 selections have been advised the vast majority being each way. Odds have ranged from 1.83 up to 17 averaging around the 7 mark so an each way selection will show a small profit if placing. Best priced winner has been at odds 15.00 with the best winning streak of 3 races against a losing sequence of 10 and a strike rate of 33% should give some hope even if it is well below the claimed level.
However, the actual performance is very patchy and over 9 months a profit of just 7 points has been achieved – the historic performance showed an average of 15 points a month. The author is quick to crow about a winner but has not offered any advice to those who may have stayed the course here – even at the low end subs seen you would have needed to stake £25 per point just to cover the outlay.
The service title is clearly a misnomer and you have to wonder who advises authors to set themselves up for such a fall. Many of the selections have been glaringly obvious on the day and while the tendency to conservative betting each way makes general sense the performance here does not support the claims made. If the recent up-turn continues there may be some merit in the service but our experience leads to the view that another poor run is not far away. I was tempted to class the service as failed but perhaps a little harsh so will categorise as neutral for now. We would not recommend subscribing though.